Comments on UX Design-Planning Not One-man Show

Samuel Wev — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 20:56:37 GMT

This is a great article, lot of good work and excellent diagrams – Interesting article & comments.
And by the way I’ve visited your blog – great work! – Are you available for a intranet project?

Holger Maassen — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:19:52 GMT

Thank you all for your replies and comments.
Yes – I will write another article on Boxes and Arrows – but I have so less time – Currently you can find latest articles and ideas on http://www.ux4dotcom.blogspot.com
And YES – I am available as a freelancer :-) but I’ve currently working permission just in Europe – I’m still waiting for my Green-Card for the US :-)

Steven Strait — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 09:22:15 GMT

This serves as a great overview – interesting and helpful for experts but especially for someone who’s very new to the area.
Relevant to the topic at hand: http://www.uie.com/articles/assessing_ux_teams/

adam qureshi — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:09:30 GMT

Holger!

WOW ! excellent info ! Holger i think i need you for my next meeting with my client ! are you available ? keep it coming !

Christopher Butler — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:21:39 GMT

Holger,

I enjoyed your article very much, and appreciate the depth with which you have began to deal with the subject. In particular, I appreciated how your “lines of work” diagram indicated several phases of prototyping. This is something that I have found to be critical to a successful project as it takes into account the media by which team members communicate most effectively, as well as that which is most effective for providing a preliminary user experience prior to any real development. While some team members may find a paper prototype the most effective means to communicate initially, a functional, interactive prototype that is accessible in a collaborative environment is much more suitable for beginning to actually experience the decisions that have been made by the team so far. And, in response to your question (“Is it just one who is responsible or is it the team which is in charge of UXD-P?”), clearly a well-rounded team is needed, but also one that has some hierarchy for the sake of accountability. As they say, speed of the leader, speed of the team.

In response to Marcel’s comments about preliminary business analysis, I couldn’t agree more. My firm has added a recommended strategic review to our project anatomy, as we’ve been burned many times by constantly evolving requirements that disrupt the progress of a project and expand its scope to an unsustainable degree. This is especially important for any company that plans to actually do business online (as opposed to having a simple online presence or an application not related to their primary product or service). While we’ve found that those clients with already successful operations tend to reach success online more easily than those without a proven track record, it is never a guarantee that a business will work both on and offline using the same plan and resources. As Marcel notes, evaluating these concerns prior to any other project planning is a critical but often overlooked step.

Chris

Holger Maassen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:09:44 GMT

Hello Kristi
Thank you – It gives me pleasure when you can take advantages of the story.
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
Hello Ross
Thx for your comment – You are right that we need more knowledge of the user concerning his feelings – his behaviour beyond “do, say, make” – but how to measure / determine? I can just listen to the things the user say and observe what he does and makes. I didn´t forget this perspective – you’ll find these considerations in different paragraphs of the story. We can make up personas to have a feeling for his feelings / to get a “window” or “door” to his view / his vision.
I just found this video on Neuroscience in Retail. http://online.wsj.com/public/page/8_0004.html?bctid=15531…
I deem it’s interesting what Dr. David Louis said to the potential to make use of these findings in this tape.

Ross Howard — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:23:17 GMT

An interesting article, not sure I am on-board with all of it. But allow me to join in the existentialist banter and note the following:

“When all three perspectives (do, say, make) are explored together, we are able to realize the experience spectrum of the “normal” user/customer we are working for.”

Actually, there is another (and arguably) more important perspective and that is how a user *feels*.

I’d also be careful with the cleaving off of design and planning. Design has always been about experience, visual design is just a part of it. Design vs Planning is another interesting discussion that would be worth exploring.

Kristi Colvin — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:41:08 GMT

Holger, this is a great article. I especially like the “timeline” diagrams toward the end, because I think the first one, is often the expectation of how user experience and the visual design will work in a given project, but the second diagram, which shows the peaks of certain elements, yet virtually all the components being done for the duration of the project, is significantly more accurate in the real world of software design, especially that is rushed to market. Usually, as the UE person and the visual designer, I am working concurrently with developers and product marketing in iterations of planning, design and development. If people understood the timing to begin with, the pressures and expectations might not be so intense. Thanks for this great article!

KrisC

Nicholas Lam-Thien — Mon, 26 May 2008 09:52:07 GMT

In general and first of all, i have to point-out my profound interest in the subject of concept and information architecture, due to the fact that Holger has become a kind of my mentor at the work at argonauteng2 since a few months, even tough I never heard of IA or UE seriously half year ago.

All in all I guess it’s an awesome article to emblaze the essential premises of successful IA/UE. Especially for me as an job beginner and in terms of correct understanding what this subject is about the article provides me with the most needed information to start the job with a special point of view and with some little background information which always should have been kept in mind to achieve the key success factors in our job.

I’m not a typical designer, concept developer or information architect – strange to say that I would claim being a mixture of all of them. By reason of the development of my further career I started developing and designing websites more on a “looks-good” level than on a “works-and-looks-good” level. This aspect has to be considered due to the fact that media has changed in some way. It has become more complex, more interactive and so the demands of clients has also rapidly grown as well as the users demands. A long time ago I built a lot of websites on the basis of “how I would use the website”. I strongly relied on my intuition, but, nowadays I know: it’s hazardous, because not only demands have become more complex, but information as well. In former times it worked and clients were quite happy, and now my demand on user-centered websites has raised, not least by the sensitization by Holger for the different influences which play a strong role in the work of IAs.

The issue that concept development or information architecture has to do with the most important ports to design department, account management department or technical department, it has become a desirous job outlook for me. I’m interested in a lot of things and I’m definitely convinced that people like Holger are that kind too. And today we have to be flexible, to open our eyes and ears widely, to react on our surrounding and maybe to build our surrounding with regard to other people who will be living in it (for example our childs). So, in addition to this, I guess that Holger’s article reflects this attitudes in a very positive way.

I would appreciate a spoken presentation on your article, Holger – that would make me glad and it would definitely be an enrichment for all upcoming information architectures.

Holger Maassen — Fri, 13 May 2011 09:37:57 GMT

Hi Marcel
Yes I had – I have been working on solutions for websites, intranets, mobile and terminal application, but also for software applications. You are right when you see the points you mentioned in the “green line”. How exactly the lines ought to flow depend on the subject, efforts and timelime.
My intention to wrote this story had been influenced by several disappointments out of ineffective, strictly and firmly divided design processes. Aside from the basement (here I see for instance the business analysis) of the process I saw always huge problems when we did the overall design process in divided steps.
A clear communication between web developers and our clients and among members of the development team is a or the key to the success of a project. The main focus of the story is how we involve the user and how we put the user in the center of the process. Out of my experiences there are several gaps between UXD-P and business or marketing analysis. In the UXprocess we are looking at users ( HCI, IA, IxD, human factors, … ) – business or marketing analysis has its focus on customers ( sociology, statistics, demographics, … ).
We (planner, designer, developer and none the less the client) have all the same aim, to offer the best possible user experience across all customer touch points. But we have different perspectives on the settings.
That is the reason why I didn´t mention business analysis and technical requirements in detail.

Marcel Britsch — Fri, 13 May 2011 09:37:42 GMT

Hi Holger,
interesting article, and I strongly agree that you do raise some very important points here. Having seen similar articles recently I just wanted to flag one thing that is often overlooked in those discussions:
Business Analysis.

Having worked with clients and agencies on a wide variety of online projects, I came to realize that quite often, the client’s reqiurements, as well as their strategic and technical capabitlities are often overlooked. Instead agencies create something nice with loads of usability, that not necessarily works for the client or satisfies the underlying requirement, or more important doesnt even meet client expecations.

I strongly believe that there is another element reuqired in those models above, that of the business analyst. We have made very good experiences in capturing business requirments, modelling use cases and then having the rest of the team, on that basis continue their work. (Of course the process is iterative and there are feedback loops).

The advantages are:
- better understanding of the client, and not only of the end-customer, but of the business you as an agency are actually working for
- being able to support the client’s business strategy and therefore add true value
- undestanding capabilities, risks, contraints and oportunities around all aspects of a project (how often do online projects not deliver because of a business process change that could not be achieved or due to a third-party integration gone wrong?)
- align the team and ensure common and consisten undestanding of project objectivs and success criteria
- baseline for client sign off, development and testing
and so on

The reasons why this aspect overlooked, I believe, are historical: Online media being considered less technical and more fluffy than software development. The funny thing is that this goes both ways: Application development requres not only business analysis, but also user experience design, and very design led projects als may need business analysis, even banner campaigns. In the end, there are client expectations to be met, so no project without business requirements – even if the agency defines them for / with the client – - and the more complex, technical or process heavy such products become…

I believe you actully have it in your model: It is the extension of the green line for techincal resource to the beginning of the project.
I personally believe that there should be a specific role tasked with the aspects I mentioned, which has, depending on the project, their main effort at the beginning of the project, and will then, depending on the type of project be involved furhter down the line more or less.

Have you had any experience with this?

Holger Maassen — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:03:14 GMT

Hello Jonathan
Thanks for your comment. ... And I´ll try to answer you – given that I got you right. I strongly believe that there are always several ways to come to a good result. The way and the steps we need will depends on the marginal conditions – but the core element in UXD-P is the spirit that we have to work as one – and not as lone fighters – who fights for IA or usability or visual appearance.
Did I have you right? ... Or am I a bit slow on the uptake? – If I got you wrong – please can you specify your question – what you mean?

Jonathan Baker-Bates — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:07:31 GMT

This is one of the better design process descriptions I’ve read, and I seem to have read a great deal of them. I hope you will therefore forgive me if I ask what might be a silly question. In describing UXD-P, do you mean that there are other ways of performing UX design that do not involve what you describe? While I agree with much of what you write, but I’m unclear why you’re saying it.

Holger Maassen — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:20:46 GMT

I subscribe to your opinion/view about culture – more and also less – ... in any case it´s interesting point. The specifically cultural skills, knowledge and experience in each set of circumstances are often wrongly understood as hindrances to development work. I quite agree with you that we have to look for this point(s). And this might be a “problem” which not to be underestimated. And furthermore for the future and or multicultural projects, it will be of major significance that culture is given adequate consideration. But … Is it not so that one element of culture is a part of individual history / his former experiences? I think Yes! But the longer I think about your comment I see the second element of culture and that´s a part of environment. This element of culture isn´t related to a person himself – it´s related to the area “customer in the present” in my Flow Of Experience diagram. Thanks a lot for your comment – Your comment will provide me ample food for thought. :-) thx

Jamie Owen — Fri, 13 May 2011 09:36:40 GMT

Thanks for this article, Holger. It’s helpful that you’ve reinforced a distinction between the different roles and their responsibilities on a team. And that some of us can be several of these roles at a given design phase.

And I also liked the thread about ‘context’ that runs through your article. Lewin’s equation is a good client-digestible artifact that considers context’s influence on behavior. But I think the extra dimension of multiculturalism is missing from it (This is not negative reflection on you, of course). I would add a C for culture in the formula, making it B = f(PEC).

A person behaves (B) in a certain way in a given environment (E). But people from another culture© may act differently given that same environment. They may respond in an unexpected way. They may make an unpredictable decision based on that other culture’s cognitive habits or communication style. Or that person might get confused because the environment is unfamiliar.

I think that if an experience which requires a multicultural design sensibility is called for, all your ideas and charts need two or more layers. For example, the Do/Make/Say evaluations are performed on subjects from all cultural populations that can be identified for a given experience. Each subject approaches the design in context of his/her cultural values (i.e. what has utility for you might not have utility for me); the team may have to consider two or more distinct possible Do/Make/Say perspectives for a given environment and then design accordingly.

And considering differing cultures which might experience the same UX, there may be a disconnect in your Flow Of Experience diagram (one of my favorites in your article). The Former Experiences population may not be able to undertake the Present State because of mismatched knowledge/abilities/likes. Or they may have different Forthcoming Experiences based on their cultural influences, experiences that the Present state cannot prepare them for.

I know it means extra work to plan and design for one or more additional user groups, but I think it’s valuable to do so. It might lead to a higher ROI.