ED/UX is an interesting discipline, from a design standpoint it has a lot less in common with some of the other design disciplines that we are familiar with like graphic design or product (industrial) design. Unlike those design disciplines ED/UX has not really evolved from a single craft, it seems to be a way of thinking about design problems that can act as a conceptual umbrella to many other disciplines. The primary goal of ED/UX is to balance the needs, wants, and aspirations of users/customers with the goals of the organization, by taking a holistic, contextually rich view of a customers experience with an organization, its products, services and employees.
Victor Papanek in his 1971 book called “design for the real world” had this to say about industrial designers (swap industrial for experience and it makes an interesting argument).
“…the various sciences and technologies have become woefully compartmentalized and specialized. often, more complex problems can only be attacked by teams of specialists, who often speak only their own professional jargon. Industrial designers, who are often members of such a team, frequently find that, besides fulfilling their normal design function, they must act as a communication bridge between other team members. Frequently the designer may be the only one who speaks the various technical jargons. Because of his educational background, the role of team interpreter is often forced upon him. So we find the industrial designer in a team situation becoming the “team synthesist.”
This book shows that designers have struggled and continue to struggle with similar challenges that were identified 30 odd years ago, it’s a good read, BTW it was published by Pantheon Books.
It seems intuitive that the creation of a superior user experience should lead to a competitive advantage, certainly it is well documented that Disney, Virgin, Starbucks and others have crafted an experience for customers that makes them difficult to compete against. All of those previous examples the experience is mediated largely by the employees[1] of those companies, those employees can engage, adapt and serve customers with diverse needs, moods and emotions.
In the case of an E-Business where the major mediator of the customers experience are the various web-based interfaces the organization provides. Increasingly it is becoming understood by E-Businesses that they also need web-based interfaces that engage, adapt and serve providing a satisfying, appropriate experience for customers, engendering trust, loyalty and a deepening of the relationship.
This really makes me think one of Steve Jobs design mantras, specifically the design should be anthropomorphic, ie. it should exhibit human characteristics (bare in mind he?s coming at this primarily from an industrial/product design perspective). When I think about anthropomorphic in relation to web sites I tend to think about behavior, I think amazon.com, for instance exhibits empathy when it seems to think ahead, like the text on buttons allaying my fears of what?s going to happen, my possible fear of the unknown. I know the machine is not actually showing empathy, but the person who designed it is and the interface is an agent of that action.
[1]Clearly the employees are supported by an environment, product and communication materials that all contribute to the intended experience. Branding guru Wally Olins describes the aspects of an organization that customers can experience are Behavior (mainly through people), Environment, Communication and Product.
What does living in the information age really mean? What really changes, I guess I think about it mostly in terms of how it effects stuff. The price of stuff, the quality of stuff, learning about stuff, the ease of getting stuff; as you can tell I’m a bit of a gear head (some might say gear whore). Well what can I say, I’ve been brought up in an age of consumption an age of stuff, believe it or not I’m only the third or forth generation that has build its identity around consumption.
My position in society has been primarily defined by my consumption, mostly because that was my role, i was not someone who had access to the necessary “means of production”, ie. capital, know-how and labor. The fact we are in an information economy, then, would suggest we are on the cusp or even in the process of our relationship to the means of production changing?
Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
The means of production are still capital, labor and know-how, but how much you need of each part is changing.
A great example of this is of course open-source software, capital was not the major part of that equation, it was know how and labour.
I’ve put a paper on line that I did for my MBA that discusses the issues of the Network Society, again it’s rather academic and was written under pressure so be kind, lots of references.
Continue reading ‘Network Society: Changing Production and Consumption’
I’m currently reading Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software, by Steven Johnson. It seems like a really interesting book, it’s basically about how very simple rules can lead to complex behaviour. Emergence ironically enough was a very big topic at the last O’Reilly Emerging technology conference. Some of the best online experiences are based upon the ideas of emergence, email, IM, weblogs….. the internet, Hmmm. Are the best experiences slightly designed? Are the best experiences frameworks for users to create in? Is that a way for organizations to harness the creativity of its customers?
Also check out this fantastic article on boxes and arrows, The Sociobiology of Information Architecture which also talks about the emergence.
Latest Comments
RSSSam Carrara, TUFF, -anssi- [...]
Roe, Stephanie Agresta
Tony Edwad
David Polinchock, christoph
sean
John Eckman, Life Tester