Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Dakota Reese Brown

Dakota Reese Brown — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:10:17 GMT

Hi Brian,

This is a tough question that gets tougher when you phrase it as “non-technical designers.”

For example, we just had a project where the client had an existing marketing site (all in Flash) with content that was brought in via an XML feed.

The client wanted several things:
-They wanted a CMS to manage that XML data…specifically so that a receptionist could make updates.
-They wanted a blog.
-They wanted a non-Flash version of the site for accessibility concerns.
-Finally they wanted the non-Flash version to scale well/be customized for mobile devices.

Do to my experience with 3 of the CMSs you mentioned, I was able to make a fairly quick recommendation that WordPress could do all of this with a minimal amount of custom programming.

I think that this type of use case might be the kind of situation where a UX Designer (sometimes) has to make a recommendation- especially if your team is ambushed with the question…but it does circle back to the question of technical aptitude.

One thing I’d recommended regardless is to dissect as many varied examples of implementations of these CMSs as possible. It might even be better if the developer of the site was present to explain what specific features of the CMS are being used where and how they may have been customized this way or that (I’m specifically thinking of creative ways the concept of a “post” has been used in various WordPress implementations).

To speak directly to a UX Designer’s typical duties, how does knowledge of a CMS’ functions inform how we would do IA or wireframe for a project being implemented on one of those platforms?

I rambled a bit, but I hope something in there was useful.

Dakota Reese Brown — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:20:40 GMT

I’ve found traction in the past by breaking things (potentially brainstorming) down along 3 different lines:

1. Strategy
I’ve positioned strategy as a practice of business modeling/client positioning that might span several experiences. The specific brainstorming question have been: What are the business needs of the client? To what general audiences are they trying to serve/sell stuff too?

2. Information Architect and/or Content Development
What are the needs of the content this experience will host? What content exists? What content needs to be developed?

3. User Experience
Who is actually going to use/visit this experience? What are they looking to get out of it? On a near individual basis, how much do we need to incite them to do what the client wants them too?

I realize that I’ve made some gross generalizations above, but as a digestable/non-threatening way of introducing UX in an agency setting, this approach has worked for me in the past.

Dakota Reese Brown — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:06:34 GMT

Thanks for the comment R.

I used “infer” intentionally in the sense that one can reasonably deduce/estimate a user’s commitment to an experience based upon their screen size. As I have found that this principle is not without it’s exceptions, I wanted to stay away from the terms you suggested which might present the concept as more of a presumed universal associative property which would not have been my intent.

Dakota Reese Brown — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:43:58 GMT

@Phil

I wholeheartedly agree that voice will never go away. My rationale for labeling it’s future as nebulous pertains to the challenges of designing experiences that utilize vocal input. On a high level those challenges map to social concerns of public vs. private communication and the inefficiency of vocal input.

First the social implications… How many places is it socially appropriate for you to carry on a private conversation in public? That’s what vocal input equates to- an audible private conversation between you and your device. There are places where this is acceptable and appropriate (while driving in your car), and there are places where this is a social no-no (in a crowded elevator). There are also places where this could end your career (during a meeting). The personal nature of the mobile space privileges discreet interactions, and often, speaking out loud is often not discreet.

The second challenge I see is, as I said, is the general inefficiency of vocal interface compared to GUIs. In your case study, since I don’t have that number on speed dial, it would be 12-13 keystrokes before I even had the opportunity to start to place my order. In addition to this, vocal-only interfaces have difficult time confirming user input since the only option that is typically available is ‘reading the order back’ to the user.

If we consider your vocal/GUI combo, then we arrive at the model employed by most fast food drive-thrus where you say your order out loud and receive visual confirmation of the order via a display. My question to you is, would you still use the drive-thru if you were able to simply key in your order ahead of time (potentially paying for it in the process) and then just pick it up at the window.

Dakota Reese Brown — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:50:12 GMT

@Richard

Very good questions here. Let me see if I can answer them.

As far as how are we defining mobile devices, I don’t necessarily have a strict definition for that but I think that all of your examples would qualify. As we work towards a definition I we need to look at which platforms a device supports and whether or not those platforms are opened or closed.

“Dumb” cell phones have open support for voice, sometimes messaging, and sometimes the Internet while offering typically closed support for applications. The Kindle offers closed support for applications, and arguable closed support for the Internet as well. While the PSP offers closed support for applications and open support for the Internet. Finally a digital camera typically just allows closed support for image recording applications.

Moving on, my colleagues and I typically joke that an interface is truncated as long as you wouldn’t want to use it to write your thesis with. To use another example I can access relatively the same Internet with my iPhone as I can on my laptop, but I’m not likely to use my iPhone to do research for an article. I can type that article on my my 12 inch laptop, but I would much prefer to do so via the full sized keyboard that resides on my desk.

I agree with you that voice isn’t necessarily truncated, as it is the most native of the mobile platforms, but it has similar problems with efficiency.

As far as data entry vs. data collection: Data entry would be manually typing in a 50 character URL into your mobile device’s web browser. Data collection would be scanning a QR Code that contains that URL and having the associated webpage open automatically in your browser.

Why do we distinguish between pre-installed apps vs. user installed? The most simple reason is that it demonstrates user segmentation. It is one thing to know how to use the app that controls your mobile devices camera, it is another thing all-together to be the kind of user who knows how to install an alternative app with camera-control functionality.

Finally the most basic point I can make to demonstrate relevancy of the line between the Internet and applications is that using the Internet on a mobile device requires an active data connection while this dependency doesn’t necessarily exist for an application.