Powzot

A blog about anything my little heart desires

  • Sneaky things you can do to make your designs "Human Centered"

    • 25 Apr 2011
    • 0 Responses
    •  views
    • Interaction Design Research UX Usability
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost

    Saturday I read a fantastic article by Whitney Hess, "You're not a user experience designer if..." (and you should read it too). In it she brings up really excellent points about things that a lot of "UX designers" don't actually do. Things like: talk to users, design in a vacuum, make design decisions based on personal preferences, don't use UX methods, etc.  While I completely agree, and shouted it from the Twitter roof-tops, it was a part at the end that caught my attention and made me decide to write this blog post.

    If you have the title of User Experience Designer and you want to do these things but aren’t being allowed to, don’t stand for it. 

    I've been in that situation. A lot. In fact, it was not being able to do these things as an "interactive designer" or "interactive art director"(titles that I held for the first 4-5 years of my career) that caused me to almost give up on design completely, consequently find this whole thing called "UX Design" and figure out that I was trying to do "UX design" in addition to the graphic and interaction design I was doing. It's because of this that I passionately argue for real UX design. It's also because of this that I've hacked together some covert UX methods that you can use if you're in a situation where you want to do real UX, but can't. 

    First, a disclaimer
    These are, more or less, methods I've used over the last few years when I just couldn't get approval to do real user research or testing. I will never, ever ever ever say these are "good" methods, they're just better than not doing anything. These are in no way "science" and are so far off from pure UX design methods that I'll probably get some nasty emails and comments anyway. Still, as I've been told by multiple people I really respect, "Any research/testing is better than none." 

    Also, I take no responsibility if you get fired because you get caught using these methods. I'm sorry, but it was probably for the best anyway.

    Sneaky things you can do to make your designs "Human Centered"

    Informal happy-hour individual interviews
    Chances are you probably know some people on Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/In Real Life that are like your users. (at least in someway) Can't do a real ethnographic study? Can't do formal, structured/semi-structured interviews even over the phone? It's time to head to the bar! Pick a few people and a few days, and individually take them out for a drink, preferably someplace where the music isn't too loud. Bring a notebook (or use an audio recorder if you can get away with it) and ask them questions. Ask them their opinions. TALK TO THEM. Try not to drink too much (at least until you're done.) The beauty of this is two fold. First, your participant's incentive is built in. Secondly, you can often times get a 2nd informal interview with someone that is in the bar who overhears you. Is there a sampling bias? OH YEAH, but if they pass your screening criteria take what you can get. More data is better than less in these situations.

    Surveymonkey after-hours survey
    Surveys are great, because they can kinda run themselves now thanks to the internet, all you have to do is write them. They're also great because you can get a 10 question survey with up to 100 responses per month for FREE, which means this one isn't actually going to cost you anything. (No this isn't a paid endorsement) 100 responses is good for 90% confidence (p=0.1) just FYI, so your results will actually have some statistical validity too! (assuming your questions are good)

    Diary study with friends or others who will help you
    So you can't go and run a full fledged ethnographic study, if you have really awesome friends who are close to your target user group you can get them to take a cheap notebook to work with them and self-report the things they do/frustrations they have/whatever you need to find out. Is it as good as observing? Nope. You're gonna miss a lot, I'm not going to lie. However, you're not going to miss as much as you would not doing it and just guessing. 

    Informal happy-hour cognitive walkthrough
    This is a lot like the happy hour individual interviews, except you pull some of your coworkers instead. Bring your wires, or comps or whatever you need to test with you, and tell them you want their opinion on them. The key to this one is informal, don't ask for "stories about using X."  This also has the benefit of slowing indoctrinating coworkers into the HCD fold, and slowly changing the culture to be more friendly to all of this stuff. 

    Paper prototyping on coworkers/friends/family/innocent bystanders
    If they're close to your user base, draw them a quick marker comp and ask them to pretend it's your product and perform a task on it. (I've done this on napkins before, which is why it's always good to have at least one sharpie with you at all times.) This is a legit method (maybe the most legit in the list) when you want to quickly confirm a wacky idea without having to spend time doing nice looking wires or comps. I recommend this testing method for anyone working on an early stage of a project. 

    After-hours card sort
    The Internet has made so many things better (like autotuning every sound in nature) including card sorts. Just like the survey, you can run an online card sort and kinda just ignore it except when you're setting it up and analyzing the results. Websort.Net is by far my favorite card sorting tool, and it's totally free. 

    The bottom line
    The real secret is that you can do almost any formal research or testing method informally, under the radar and on the cheap using your social network, assuming you're willing to put in some extra work after-hours. Is it perfect? No. Is it science? Kinda...it's probably got too many confounds to count though. But, it's better than nothing. Unless it's really really small, your network of friends and family online and off probably has at least a semi-representative sample of your user-base. 

    The real question is how to you present your results, or use it to argue your points? If you can get extra points for, "I did user research/testing in my off time" use it like you would if you had been allowed to do it. If not, just credit your awesome rockstar design skills. Say something like "You know, I just really get people" ...and then start looking for a real UX job. 
    • Tweet
  • Ohhhhh you said the F worrrrddd!!!

    • 15 Apr 2011
    • 0 Responses
    •  views
    • Design Rant Research
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost

    It's very funny (to me anyway) that I came out of college decrying research, it "ruined design," and a few years later my love for research informed design pushed me back into college to learn more about it. It's also funny (probably still just to me) that I continue to run into these two seemingly opposed design camps all the time, the pro and anti research designers. I'm among friends in one, and inevitably find myself defending the dreaded F**cus Gr**p in the other. It's like a bad word in a lot of circles, f**cus gr**p, and as I always end up explaining, "it's because people don't run the dreaded f**cus gr**p right." They don't ask the participants the right questions. They use it to answer the wrong kind of research questions. They blindly follow the majority opinion as if it was handed down on stone tablets. Bottom line, they fuck it up. Worse yet, this is the only research method a lot of designers, including fresh out of design school me, know. At the very least the only one they think of when someone says "research." 

    Research isn't a bad word for designers (even f**cus gr**p)
    This is the basic argument I find myself making when in the company of the anti-research designers. I'm a designer, not a researcher. I have a heavy-weight, framed piece of paper that says just that, and in December I'll have two. (This is the only "trust me, I'm a doctor" style statement you're going to get from me, I promise.) As a designer, research is just another tool in my toolbox for solving design problems. It's just like photoshop, or illustrator or my sketchbook. Research does NOT dictate design decisions, it informs them. This is something I usually have to repeat, so I will in an obnoxious type treatment to make it stand out

    RESEARCH DOES NOT DICTATE DESIGN DECISIONS, IT INFORMS THEM. 
    (Sorry, I it wouldn't let me make it blink too.)  If you're a designer and you think back to your design classes, you'll likely remember doing some kind of asking around or looking at what other people had already done in that space for every project you did. That's research. AND it isn't a f**cus gr**p. (It's likely a competitive analysis or an unstructured individual interview, for the researchers in the audience keeping track.) Your research didn't totally take away all your choices as a designer, and you probably didn't completely change your initial gut feelings based on it. It didn't dictate your design. But it did inform you, and you might have modified some of your initial assumptions, and you may have abandoned bad ideas if they proved to be bad, or already done, or whatever you found. It may have even given you an idea because you saw something new and it sparked something awesome in your crazy designer brain. This is why good research, used correctly is magical.  

    Let's talk about the damn f**cus gr**p for a minute
    (Warning: this is a rant, you have been warned.)
    Most people (especially in advertising) ruin focus groups. This is not an "ivory tower" opinion. This is my on the ground, in the trenches throwing grenades, practitioner's opinion. They're not looking for additional information to inform the design, they're looking for truth. Worse yet, they're not just looking for a truth, they're looking for "The Truth," a totally generalizable (ecologically valid for you researches still keeping track) truth. One that describes everyone like their group everywhere. A group that is usually structured to represent everyone on the planet. Sorry, a f**cus gr**p is the wrong test for finding "The Truth." It's a qualitative test that is at best going to give you an idea of your specific group's opinions, if and only if you recruit the right group and ignore the idea of group think and follow the leader mentality in groups like this, and dont' have one guy who does 80% of the talking for the whole group. At best you're going to be able to say "we showed it to 10 people and 2 of them told us all these things." F**cus gr**ps are not generalizable, period! The are not "The Truth," and to use them as such is foolish, and you should feel sorry for those people because they're likely going to lose a lot of money.

    If you're going to hate the f**cus gr**p , hate it for these reasons.  Don't hate it because "research kills creativity." it doesn't, it focuses creativity, and gives you new jumping off points if it's done well.

    Design is not art, deal with it. 
    This is the other argument that is used to try and defend the anti-research designer position, "Design is art." This is a horse that's been beaten to death, and I'm usually one of the people holding a bat. Design is not art. It can be objectively evaluated because the whole goal of design is problem solving. The goal of Art is expressing the ideas, emotion and opinions of the artist. You can't do that wrong. That's what makes it art. You can't look at art and realistically say, "The artist totally failed to capture the way she was feeling in this piece." You can look at design reasonably say, "this piece fails to capture the attributes of our brand," or "this product is hard to use and it's even harder to look at," or even "why would you design a shirt with no neck hole, no one can wear this!" Design can be wrong. The confusing part is that there are usually many solutions to the same design problem, and all of them are right, but the wrong ones are still wrong. 

    There is absolutely an art to design, and great design often does the things art does too, but design is not art. It's design. Even when it conveys emotion. Even when it conveys opinion. Design is concerned with solving a problem that most likely has multiple solutions, and this is why research is such a great tool. It can help you sift through those worse solutions, that are still technically right, to find the great ones. Why wouldn't you want something to help you sift through an endless pile of hay to find the five needles you're looking for?

    So what...?
    Research is your friend, dear fellow designers. It can lead you to new ideas, better ideas, by pointing to the right path in the tangled map of options we have; and if it's done well that's all it will do. Research can't ever substitute the thoughtful work of a good designer, because good research isn't creative. To quote Dr. David Evans of Psycster research (one of my graduate school instructors): 

    A research study by it’s very nature is a cheap, fast proxy to reality.

    It's a peak out the window. A designer takes all the information she has about a problem, combines it with everything else she knows and turns it into a solution. Well done research is just one more thing the designer gets to know and use. If you want to be an anti-research designer, why not be an anti-bad-research designer? 
    • Tweet
  • Reading Recommendations

    • 26 Feb 2011
    • 0 Responses
    •  views
    • Design How-to Interaction Design Research UX Usability
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost
    In the last few weeks I've had a few people ask me if I could recommend any books on design. The short answer is yes I can, but mostly only because I have a thing for books and I can't go into a bookstore without buying at least four, so I just happen to have a lot of books. (Yes, I have read them all, thank you very much.) The reason this is the short answer is because I'm firmly in the camp that to become a designer you simply have to start designing. A lot. A whole lot. It's a very learn by doing skill, even interaction and experience design. However, there are a lot of great books I've read that have added a lot of little interesting tidbits to the experience of just being a designer for years and years, so I thought I'd make that list and share it with anyone who was interested.

    These are by no means the definitive reading list, just what I've read over the the years, or have on my current reading list. I've also thrown in some movies and a couple card decks that I really love. The best advice I can give any designer is the advice given to me during a junior year portfolio review by  John Jay, a creative director from Wieden + Kennedy (I majored in Advertising and Graphic Design for my undergrad, so I had mostly words of wisdom from designers working in advertising) and it is:

    The great ideas are out on the streets, in a club or a bar or a park, not in your office or at your desk. Make sure you get up from your desk every once and a while and experience it.  

    So read some of these books, but then go out and experience the world and find inspiration and solutions to your design problems in those experiences. If you want to be a designer, or you want to be a better designer, just start designing lots of stuff. Practice makes perfect.

    The List

    Interaction/Experience Design
    • The Design of Everyday Things - Norman
    • Designing Interactions - Moggridge
    • Sketching User Experiences - Buxton
    • Emotional Design - Norman
    Design Basics
    • Design Basics - Pentak
    • Graphic Storytelling and Visual Narrative - Eisener (this is technically a book about making comics, but I've found it very helpful to know these concepts designing interactions, because I can use them to help tell other people about my ideas via storyboard)
    Design History
    • History of Modern Design - Raizman (this is a must read in my opinion)
    • Dictionary of Design since 1900 - Julier 
    • Dictionary of Graphic Design and Designers - Livingston
    Design Documentaries
    • Objectified
    • Helvetica
    Graphic Design Quickstarts
    • The Non-designer's design book - Williams
    • The Mac is not a Typewriter - Williams
    • Making and Breaking the Grid - Samara (this is a must have reference if you're doing any visual design)
    • Lettering for Production - Gates (out of print)
    Ad books that could be helpful
    • Hey Whipple Squeeze This - Sullivan
    • Hoopla - CP+B
    • Pick Me - Vonk & Kestin
    Other Fun stuff
    • Art and Copy (movie)
    • Please Exit Through the Giftshop (movie)
    • The Story of Stuff (the 2007 original) (movie)
    • Ideo Method Cards
    • Handbook of Usability Testing - Rubin & Chisnell
    • Mental Notes Cards
    • Control: A History of Behavioral Psychology - Mills
    • Emotions Revealed - Ekman
    • ReInventing Comics - McCloud
    • Comics and Sequential Art - Eisener 
    Books I'm Currently Reading (but can't recommend beyond that because I haven't finished them yet) 
    • Living with Complexity - Norman
    • Unmasking the Face - Friesen
    • Behavioral Analysis and Measurement Methods - Meister
    • Ambient Findability - Morville
    If you have any suggestions (stuff I could add to my currently reading list), leave them in the comments :)
    • Tweet
  • Why nobody likes research

    • 7 Feb 2011
    • 0 Responses
    •  views
    • Design Rant Research
    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost
    Ok, not nobody. I love research. You might. Your boss probably doesn't. Her boss almost certainly doesn't. Yes yes, this is only the case most of the time, not all of the time. But why is that?

    Research is Expensive
    It costs money to do any kind of research. Even if you're just looking things up on the internet, that time costs someone money. If you're actually doing research with research subjects you usually have to pay them. You usually have to buy materials to conduct your research, if you don't have them already. Some times you have to travel. Bottom line, it hurts the bottom line. (ok not really, but we're not there yet)

    Research Takes Time
    You have to design a study. Find people to participate. Run the study. Analyze all the data you collected. Make sense of all your analysis. Even a "quick little survey" isn't really that quick most of the time. And "time is money." (See above pun about the bottom line.)

    Henry Ford Ruined Research
    Or at least he did in the minds of people who are too busy to understand an often quoted Henry Ford snippet:

    If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses. — Henry Ford

    I've heard this "famous quote" more times in the last six months than any other, often to justify to me why we can't do research. First, I can't actually find the source of this quote. I haven't spent hours and hours searching, but an hour on Google, GoogleScholar, wikiQuotes and wikipedia have left me with no source for it. The point is, he may have never said it. He did not invent the automobile, he just was the first to mass produce it cheaply. But it doesn't matter, because he's getting credit for saying it. And because he's a great name in American business, it carries weight. The problem is, it misses the point entirely. 

    There are no silver bullets, and Henry Ford probably knew this, even if you (or your boss) don't
    This has been beaten to death I'm sure, but "asking people what they wanted" is simply asking the wrong question. Yes, if you ask someone directly "what can I make you?" they're going to define it in terms they already know. Like "faster horses." You're not looking for THE answer with research, your looking for clues to AN answer. 

    Assuming the Ford quote is true, then yes had he asked people what they wanted they likely would have told him something about horses. They were the primary means of travel at the time. Followed by walking if you couldn't afford a horse. He also might have gotten lucky, if he'd asked enough people, and gotten a couple cars and an airplane. Those would have been the "crazy outliers." But, if he had asked them "What is it about travel now that you dislike the most?" he likely would have learned things like: horses have to rest every few hours while pulling a wagon, it's not easy to take care of a horse, it's expensive to take care of a horse, dogs and other animals can spook a horse and that's very dangerous, etc. He would have found problems to make solutions for. Problems that the mass production of the automobile would eventually solve. 

    This is what the people who swear that research is a waste of time fail to see, because they expect it to be a silver bullet and it's not. It never is. It's more about finding out what the problems really are, if you're making your thing for the right people, or if your solution is correct but not defined in terms the right people understand. These are the qualities that make the great things you love. I guarantee it. You can't make something great on purpose without knowing the answers to these kinds of questions, and it's very expensive to try and stumble into greatness all the time. 

    In the end...
    The Ford quote is often used to defend the stance of the "lone genius" even if sometimes that "lone genius" is a team at a company. That's simply not the way to make great things. Awesome doesn't happen in a vacuum, or a silo or sitting at your desk with the blinders on for 18 hours. It happens when you ask the right people the right questions to figure out what that "awesome" is, before you start searching. Had Ford "asked people" (and I don't know if he or anyone else did for him) he may have found out that things like "with electric lights, people can more safely drive in the dark." And maybe he did. The point is, Model-T aside, the only way you can know if you're solving a problem is to ask the people you think have it. Not to ask them what the answer to your design problem is, because they won't know. But to ask them what their problem is, so you can design a solution to it. It's these well researched, well designed solutions that make the research effort pay for itself many times over. They're the solutions that become the next big thing, which is actually good for the bottom line (see, I got there). Those well researched solutions are the only kind that will consistently lead to a great experience for the user, even if Henry Ford supposedly said otherwise.  
    • Tweet
  • About

    All thing things I can think of (mostly about design, UX, advertising and technology) unedited (but spellchecked) and ready for internet prime-time.
    More about.me

    31776 Views
  • Archive

    • 2011 (15)
      • July (1)
      • June (3)
      • April (4)
      • March (1)
      • February (6)
    • 2010 (10)
      • July (5)
      • June (3)
      • January (2)
    • 2009 (24)
      • December (2)
      • November (7)
      • October (2)
      • July (1)
      • June (2)
      • May (1)
      • February (4)
      • January (5)

    Get Updates

    Subscribe via RSS
    Twitter
  • My Sites

    • Not Just Pretty Pictures