On May 20, 2008, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability, Interaction, Interface.
I just came across this on www.dusteddesign.com. In their tag navigation, the length of the link tag is proportional to the number of articles it contains. I can’t say this works, or that I’d employ it, but it’s interesting and I applaud their thinking.
On April 4, 2008, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, methods.
As I was preparing for a brainstorming session, I started thinking about how to start discussion about a business’ users without explicitly asking “who do you think your users are?” That approach seemed rife with canned answers; I was looking for something different.
So, I put together a post called “Hire Your Users: a brainstorming technique” over on the Capstrat blog. To whet your appetite, here’s a snippet:
“Hire Your Users” is technique that would be applied in early discovery to start defining these boundaries. Using the metaphor of a hiring process, it helps design strategists and stakeholders collaborate on who the users are, in what order they should be considered, what they need to accomplish, and how they might do so.
Go check it out, if you have a moment. I’d like to hear your thoughts about this too.
On March 9, 2008, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Usability, Interaction.
When people asked me what a “user experience” designer was, I usually gave them the following answer: “I try to make software easier to use.” Simple and approachable, and without the arm-waving, chest-puffing that we UXDs use to justify what we do.
After reevaluating that canned response, I realize I was wrong.
As a UX designer, what I’m really after is trying to make software more pleasurable, which is not the same as easier. Pleasure is larger than that, and includes wonder, exploration and serendipity. Sometimes, easier isn’t always better.
Case in point, I like espresso. Scratch that–I have a real problem with it, in the way that addictions can creep into and start to change a person’s life. I’ve invested in $200+ coffee grinders. I go out of my way to buy beans in small batches from people who roast it that day. I adapt my grind for humidity and time my doppios to hit the 25-27 second mark. I’ve measured my tamp pressure to 30lbs using a bathroom scale. I’ll probably start roasting at home unless someone stops this sordid affair.
For god’s sake, I’ve watched YouTube videos showing shots pulled through naked, bottomless portafilters.
Making espresso is not for the impatient or half-assed. If you want to make it yourself, you’ve got to fully commit. No espresso-head, I argue, would consider pulling a good shot an easy task. All the elements have to be in place. Anything awry–old beans, bad water, weak tamping, too fine or too coarse grind–can lead to swill. I know because I’ve choked it down, and still do so frequently.
But I’m learning.
I love the process simply because it is not easy. Actually, it’s the opposite. It’s a wonderful challenge, with a delicious reward. The learning curve is part of the fun, in a way that mastery of an art should be. If easy was what I was after, I’d head down to the local indie coffeehouse and plunk down my 2 bucks.1 If I was conducting a usability test on the process, I’d have to conclude that it completely fails. But that disregards the other intangibles, such as the thrill of mastery.
So, to say that “user experience” is always about making things easier isn’t the whole story. User efficiency is definitely a factor, but not singularly so. Delight and engagement–often the byproducts of ease of use–are higher objectives to work toward. It all depends upon the context; ease of use is simply one factor to consider.
1 This is hypothetical. I haven’t found a place nearby that does a decent job of espresso. I won’t name names, but let’s just say that I’m underwhelmed with what I’ve received at the ITB Raleigh coffeehouses.
On March 7, 2008, Todd posted this entry in Design, User Experience, Usability, Interaction, Interface, Development, methods.
A few days ago, I wrote a post on the Capstrat blog about this idea I’ve been working out. It’s called Pidgin, which is a diagramming tool to accomplish two goals in tandem. One, Pidgin is aimed at providing definition to what a UI needs to encompass. Second–but in unison–it needs to be less prescriptive of the visual design. So basically, it’s trying to situate itself in the pre-design phase, when requirements are solid but the design is still fluffy and unbounded. Check it out here. Manners dictate that I don’t cross post.
On March 1, 2008, Todd posted this entry in Design, User Experience, Interaction, Interface, Development, methods.
At work, we’re always looking for ways to better bring personas to the creatives and the developers. One idea that we’ve been tossing around is a physical moodboard for personas. I’m calling this the Stage.
The stage is a lo-fi, physical space where personas are built and refined. It is designed to evolve and to be a work in progress. Implemented, it resembles a mood board for personas.
Carrying a deep respect for the user throughout a project’s development is critical to user experience design. Knowing who we are designing for is the responsibility of all project members. Much of the information known about the users is contained within the minds of the UX designers. The product– formal persona documents– often do not communicate the research and insights that underpin them. Often, they lack the vivacity needed for others to empathize with the users they represent. Further, they don’t easily engage other parties in the research and design process.
Much of the information that describes the user is secondary to the persona. Quotes, thoughts, misgivings, apprehensions help develop the persona but can be overly summarized to make a tight, succinct document.
Additionally, personas don’t easily invite serendipity and evolution. Research doesn’t stop once a persona document is delivered. As time progresses, inevitably designers better understand users’ behaviors and desires. The Stage invites these small bits of information in an unstructured way. It encourages discussion, change and evolution. Viewers are able to respond to these artifacts and discuss the inferences and conclusions that are drawn.
As a physical space, the Stage asserts itself and demands attention. Permanence and visibility are key to its success. It needs to occupy a space that receives constant foot traffic and where close inspection is encouraged. As a dedicated space, it invites asynchronous interaction where people can respond to it on their own time.
The Stage requires simple ingredients. Foremost is a space to place the material. It should be waist to chest high and (for us) at least 4’ x 4’. The surface should be a surface that can be written on: butcher paper, a whiteboard or similar. Nearby should be a steady supply of post it notes, markers and tape. Materials added to the Stage include screenshots, pictures, quotes, brief bios, research findings and diagrams.
A visitor should be able to glance at it and assemble an idea of the persona without reading a lengthy document. People may feel free to add and remove items from a persona as they see fit. Questions may be added to the board for other designers to react to. Generally, the Stage should resemble a work in progress; it should not appear overly structured or precious. Staying orderly and presentable can discourage others from adding their own input.
The Stage is not a replacement for personas. It exists as a shared sketchbook, the results of which are formalized into the persona documents. During the development cycle, it is a continual reference point for all members of the project team. For people outside the project—clients, visitors, for example—the Stage is a demonstration of user-centered design. It indicates how we involve the user in our approach and serves as a discussion point to further evangelize the need for understanding the user. Succinctly, the Stage helps make the research process more transparent.
The name “stage” was borne of two ideas that are relevant to the concept. From theater, the stage connotes a place where characters are presented to an audience. The Stage can also be defined as an intermediate place where concepts are still being explored and refined. Both invoke the spirit and goals of the Stage.
On September 7, 2007, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability, Interaction, Interface.
Just wanted to post an update on some of the recent events that have occurred in the Phoenix usability community.
Christopher Brya has been hard at work assembling interested members and putting together the paperwork to create a UPA chapter in Arizona. In case you’re not aware, UPA
…supports usability specialists, people from all aspects of human-centered design, and the broad family of disciplines that create the user experience in promoting the design and development of usable products.
He’s even started a blog at arizonaupa.blogspot.com. Head over there and sign up for the mailing list. If you’re interested, leave a comment on the blog about what you’d like to see the group tackle.
Theo Mandel has started putting together the framework for our local World Usability Day Event. In his words,
I would like to announce the Phoenix event for World Usability Day 2007 on November 8, 2007. The Applied Psychology Program and Cognitive Engineering Research Institute at ASU’s Polytechnic Campus have graciously agreed to host the event on their campus in Mesa. The event will take place from 6-9 p.m. on the evening of Thursday, November 8, 2007. There will be no cost to participants to attend the event.
For more information, check out the full message at the PHX UEX Google group. If you’re interested in presenting (or sponsoring of course!) definitely throw your hat into the ring.
On March 31, 2007, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Interaction.
I was using TinyURL the other day and decided on a whim to see what was located at MiniURL.org. As expected, there was a similar service to TinyURL’s: enter an URL and whammo, a shortened link.
What was pretty thoughtful was that MiniURL automatically copies the url to your clipboard. That’s a nice touch, since I’d expect the next task for most users would be to paste the url into an email or a blog post. Of course, there’s the problem that it overwrites whatever is currently in your clipboard. So, there might be a collision of expectations for some users.
I appreciate the concern anyway, even if it doesn’t work with Safari.
On March 4, 2007, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Interaction.
While I was reading an article at The New York Times, I came across a surprising little widget–one that I hadn’t seen or heard of before.
When I read for any extended session online, I have a nervous habit of highlighting the text as I go along. In this case, I began highlighting a word, lost touch of the trackpad, and tried to recover. As I did, however, I must have double-clicked the word and up popped a new window. Before I could dismiss it, I noticed that it gave me the definition for the word I had selected. Nice.
On February 4, 2007, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability, Interaction.
I’ve just started a Meetup for people interested in user experience design in Phoenix. Having just arrived here a little over 3 weeks ago, I’m surprised that there wasn’t a community for local Phoenicians to get together and discuss this discipline. That said, a bit of trolling of LinkedIn, Meetup, IxDA, and Google revealed that there is a nascent group of like-minded individuals.
So, this is a call to arms. If you’re interested in things like:
…then I entreat you to check out the group. In the future, I’d like to bring this group toward a full chapter status of the Usability Professionals Association. That’s still a ways down the road, I suspect. For now, I’m super excited about drawing together people from around the valley to discuss everything from “rules and tools” to war stories. Bring it!
On September 20, 2006, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Interface.
Over in Adaptive Path land, Todd Wilkins called out to User Experience (UEx) practitioners to reconsider the prevailing design model of tasks, goals, and situations. His assertion is that this framework falls short of delivering value since it doesn’t really mesh with how users experience the world. In its place, he offers an alternative perspective: one that would address meaning and culture via a focus on behaviors, motivations, and contexts. I won’t chance misrepresenting his words completely–you can read them for yourself over at the AP blog. G’head, I’ll wait.
While it may not have been Todd’s complete intent, his point about accommodating systems “…with multiple touchpoints…and the need for consistent and complementary interfaces…” leads to an interesting situation concerning XML-derived feeds, open APIs, and other technologies that blur the boundary of Our System versus Other Systems. We see this in the young, but growing popularity and approachability of mashup technology. Non-techies are increasingly adding Flickr streams, del.icio.us links, and YouTube videos into their weblogs, feed aggregators, and MySpace profiles.
What’s compelling about this in terms of UEx? For one thing, it means the experience we strive to maintain is expanding outside of our absolute zone of control. We can try to accommodate user goals within the sandbox of our own sites. As we publish content to other subscribers through raw XML, basic APIs, and the prefab widgets, we begin to lose control over how it is being integrated and used. Drawing a dividing line between us and them is one recourse, but one that is shortsighted. That stance presumes that the users’ experience with our systems ends when they leave our site. Should they decide to incorporate our data feeds, well then, caveat emptor. Well, that’s not the best approach to take since our responsibility migrates along with the content.
There is an alternative which permits us to extend our zone of influence and, perhaps, distinguish ourselves in the process. Actually, it’s already being used in a few choice places; YouTube is one. Many users experience this video sharing service not from being on YouTube.com, but through interacting with the video widgets it allows users to embed it on any other site. This allows users to repurpose the content, contextualizing it along the way. Embracing this behavior, YouTube created an affordance to readily share the video from within the embedded player. In a nutshell, it provides a complementary interface to their main site and allows YouTube to better manage the experience alongside the content.
The UEx practice should remember look outward and keep in mind how the published content plays with people’s lives. We need to proactively seek out how users employ our content away from our control zone. In doing so, there is an opportunity to differentiate our products. By emphasizing the experience at the touchpoints–our apis, feeds, and widgets–we can provide more value to the user and increase our chances of success.
Oomblog is a stream of thoughts, ostensibly focused on user experience.
