Editor: This paper discusses the role that interactive design should play in the whole brand communication chain. Since the original text is a theoretical document, the wording is slightly obscure, we singled out the most useful part of the interactive Chinese readers to translate, such as the translation and the original version of the original, please do not hesitate to inform us, so as to Sheng. * The original is abridged
Interactive design--from web sites to apps--is a unique way to create the ecosystem of the brand itself, putting aside the noise of the outside world. My analysis and seminars are based on brands such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi, Sega and Nintendo, Apple and Microsoft. Because these brands are not just brands to me, they are a set of systems philosophy-the key to their ability to be identified.
Consider the systems (System) and the Network (network) from two points of view.
We give brand meaning, they symbolize something important, they have their own values and a set of values that they create. So it's easy to associate brands, whether we agree with that value or not, just as they have caused everyone to react, whether positive or negative. Such situations abound as large numbers of companies and their global brands become more and more involved in the battle for consumer attention. Imagine how you would feel when you read the following words: Fox News, Oxfam, Facebook, Halliburton, BP, Goldman Sachs, Nike.
Each person's response to these words is based on different kinds of cultural and social parameters and there is a huge difference. Regardless of these, you may find it difficult to remain neutral, and these words can make you feel without any other reference--of course, the power of the brand that arises from the whole set of systems behind it.
This article explores some interesting things about how people perceive brands, react to them, and build relationships with them. But what kind of response and behavioral action can strengthen the brand's meaning? And how we, and especially the interaction designers, are designed to better understand the role we play in our work and nurture and maintain this bond.
Now, I have my own theory of interactive design, and I know very well that it is essential to consider a product or service in order to establish the coordination of the interaction design, and through this coordination, the correct logic, the past experience to achieve the same goal. We have learned to think from the point of view of system and network, I believe that design is to make it better.
Experience is balanced, differentiated, or targeted to support a brand's larger meaning.
This is reflected in the fact that the focus of the interactive design focuses on performance and usability transfer to a wider user experience, and that it is the experience that is balanced, differentiated, or targeted to support the larger meaning of a brand. And being overly focused on issues like flow and consistency makes us miss the connection, the sense of belonging, and the emotional implications that really work to highlight the attraction of a product/service. Maybe it's because our approach was originally from engineers--getting people to adapt to machines, and sometimes we're still getting bogged down in logic or a process to describe our design. The products/Services we design will always be in a vacuum, and each person will be exposed to them through a unique set of needs, tendencies, and emotional states, all of which are not ready-made design documents for you to learn.
Designers need to understand the nuances that establish consistency and coherence. Make sure that our design has a common element and behavior in any interactive mode, that is, execution mode, in other words, design documents like service blueprints or screen annotations help create.
However, similar to creating stencils to ensure that each product's originals are produced in exactly the same process, this consistency becomes repetitive and makes it less balanced between the user and the product/service being used. and coordination can strive to make users believe, and choose to become part of the brand.
This belief stems from branding and attempts to bring interaction and branding into one, creating a coherent system that is conducive to enriching and sustaining the user experience. We must create a brand model.
Between interaction and branding, the idea of consumers as a mere "user" of a product/service is being phased out, as Don Norman in his 2006 article, "Words matter." Talk about People:not Customers, not consumers, not Users. "User" is a convenient label, but continue to think in such a way, especially when humans are constantly starting to bring technology into life, this is more nuanced for interaction designers to think about our future needs no benefit.
From the enterprise outward
Think about the dialogue between the brand and the individual: Traditionally, the "brand" is spread out by the Enterprise (Editor: one-way). This communication is not directed, depending on the transmission of specific information through a wide range of media channels in a specific medium.
Now, the brand communication needs (with the audience) continuous communication and feedback. Now the designer is in a world where there are all kinds of interactive ways that they have to stride. Traditional brand-building approaches are now being expressed in a variety of different forms through various channels of communication. The collection of these expressions creates a brand's voice, style, and personality, and then the brand's meaning is born.
If your brand can talk, what does it sound like?
As my colleague Paul Valerio recently wrote, "Raiders of the Lost Overture", "The Voice of the brand" is the first thing the audience responds to, and this reaction further evokes the subsequent experience of products and services, Especially if there are no other references around. For example, I would decide to go to a movie because I like a director, even without knowing the plot or the actor. I prefer to have a product, even a whole new category of products, as long as the brand is what I can identify and recognize-unless the new category is completely beyond the image of the brand in my heart, so I think they completely mismatch. And vice versa, does my perception of Microsoft's brand voice make me ready to accept the elegance of their latest Windows Phone?
Think about the brand you work for: what is the voice of the brand in a communication? Is it knowledge or is it young and eager to learn? Is it comforting, or is it the kind of tone that inspires you to create desire and challenge?
Here are two recent examples of user interface branding to further illustrate this point.
In 2000, Apple unveiled its next-generation operating system interface: MAC OS x. Rather than introducing the system's interactive mechanism and visual language, Apple chose to create a new brand to describe the operating system: Aqua. More recently, Microsoft has also used the same strategy for Metro, a mobile-phone-operated interface that has renewed the company itself. By creating a brand that is quite different from corporate-like Aqua and Metro, Apple and Microsoft are creating more than just the new operating system, but one--especially for those geek with new technology--that can cause communication and trigger brand recognition of meaningful things. The brand propaganda of these two interactive operating systems blurs the boundaries between "product" and "brand", and this is the future shared by "brand promotion" and "interactive Design".
The responsibility of the brand propaganda department is to portray the brand Aqua/metro, they create a kind of narration around the product, in order to trigger (brand and audience) communication, in this kind of narration, the team will identify the response characteristic of the audience first. Interactive design is responsible for the continuous evolution of the narrative, so that the brand has unlimited content to communicate with the audience.
Of course, the interactive designers also need to target the enterprise in the future launch of products and services constantly build the voice of the brand.
From "person" inward
We (interactive designers) design the audience and the brand to establish a dialogue method. Through our interactive environment, we give our audiences the tools to communicate with the brand within the narrative of the design of the brand promotion department. Ensuring the integrity of the brand is also one of the responsibilities of the interactive designer, since we are responsible for giving the audience the most instinctive response to the brand, we must ensure that all brand promotion will be included in the final product and service.
Virgin Aviation is a brand with clear meaning and individuality, and fully through the brand experience. If you're attracted to the meaning of Virgin's brand, you'll never be fooled when you sit on their plane.
From the design of the Check-in Pavilion and the door number, the way of communication between the doorway and the cabin staff and the passengers, the safety announcement short film, The cabin light, and even the function of the inside entertainment system: All of these interactive links give the brand a voice, the relationship between the customer and the brand to straighten out the Virgin was successful, and it continued to set standards for first-order travel and service experience, both in terms of branding and the persistence of interactions, each of which ensured that the other side said the same.
Always remember that there is no product or service that was born out of thin air. Our design is for the attention of the target audience, and the number of products and services will only be more and more, we must understand that people have more or less awareness of the brand.
Back to the director's example: Why do I want to see a particular director's movie? The best Director is the logo of the film, and the best brand is the same. "Apple" is synonymous with simplicity, both in the product and in the visual and interactive language. This design attempts to build the brand's cognitive system, which helps Apple become one of the largest companies in the world.
The brand is also the contextual (context)
Branding is the context in which your design exists. The key to the success of a design is that the design is appropriate. When we apply different cultural backgrounds in the design context, we should consider the brand as another context. The audiences that our products and services are looking for have long been surrounded by this context, whether through the spread of the brand itself, the prevailing view, or the commentary on the brand or the competing product.
A survey of the context of the brand, thinking about the impact of our design, can help us create a more appropriate and smoother interactive experience.
Imagine Fox News out of an app, collected various channels to report on an incident, regardless of their political stance; Imagine that Facebook has made a visual map of the advertisers who have looked at your data in the past week, and imagined Goldman producing a "banker's bonus Calculator" So you can list the income of top Wall Street executives. The contrast between the product and the image will make us feel awkward and even disgusting. In fact, these companies will never do such a thing, the interactive experience must be appropriate, must be faithful to the brand image.
The role of interactive designers can now be seen as an extension of the brand advocacy team, whose experience is based on the brand image that has been formed. Interactive design now requires a deeper understanding of the environment in which it lives-the brand context, and the attempt to define a brand requires more consideration of how the brand meaning will be experienced through the product and service.
This article is compiled from: Viking wong/wayne Tai Source: fastcodesign