Interaction Designer: Discuss several ways to deal with problems

When a project begins, how does an interaction designer begin to work? What tools and methods do you need to use to solve the problem? Although many interaction designers stick to the user-centric (UCD) design approach, this is simply not true.

There are a couple of things that a new interaction designer faces when starting a project with a professional problem. Projects are generally caused by two of reasons: some things are incomplete or non-existent. "Users are complaining about this product!" "A business manager will immediately say:" We have to make a difference. "(Even if the problem is not solved, but the interaction designer should find the problem) maybe someone is thinking somewhere:" Maybe that would be better. "And when resources such as money, time and manpower are available, the project can begin."

But when a project starts, how does an interaction designer begin to work? What tools and methods do you need to use to solve the problem? Although many interaction designers stick to the user-centric (UCD) design approach, this is simply not true. In this section, we will discuss several ways to deal with problems . But first, I would like to talk about the problem itself.

1. Question of the question

There's an old joke about software developers. When engineering encounters unexpected problems and ingenious solutions, developers often joke, "Oh, that's not a loophole, it's a feature." "Although this is just a joke, designers often cover up problems when they solve their own projects," he said. In fact, the designer has an old joke: "It's not a problem, it's an opportunity." ”

Before a design is involved in a project, an enterprise often encounters or discovers a problem or a hidden problem. The current one product sales or work is not good, or can not keep up with the mobile phone like six months of update speed. Or competitors have launched better products, like in the mid 1990s, companies have launched the best internet browsers. or open up a new market, a large number of products to meet the needs of the market. At this point, IP voice telephony (VoIP) has become a reality, the application of telephony on the network needs to be designed. These "problems" become the foundation of an interactive designer's growth.

Unless the problem is simple and difficult to define (for example, a user cannot find a small button at the bottom of the space), the interaction designer should not be deceived by the surface of the problem. Most of the time, the problem seems simple, but it's actually not.

These problems seem simple, and it is difficult for users to find buttons at the bottom of a space. A simple solution might be to put the button in a better position or make it more visible by color, size, or shape. But that could lead to even bigger problems. Maybe the space area is too long. Maybe the user doesn't understand why to fill in this space, not that they don't have the button, but they can't do it. Or, they are afraid to click the button and do not know what will happen. And so on, simple questions can lead to bigger problems.

Having said so much, when working, the interaction designer does not necessarily complicate the problem too much to understand its own task. Sometimes, a button problem is just a button problem. Not every project needs to be reversed to redo. In this way, the interactive design community will be very impatient. But this is going to be the subject of the book, and you must think twice before you do it. If the button is big enough to solve the problem, then make the button bigger.

But the buttons are too small to be a common problem with interactive design. Of course such problems exist, but designers often face a lot more messy problems. These questions are often referred to as "evil questions", in the the 1960s design theorist H. That is how J. Rittel mentioned these issues. Such a question has not been fully understood, and its boundaries have become blurred. Many of them have a say, they have many constraints, and there is no definitive solution. It sounds interesting, doesn't it? However, this is a problem that designers have to deal with, especially interactive designers. Design is not a cause for worry.

2. Identification of programmes

The question of research should not be a person's business. Many designers have the idea that they don't know everything. Designers need to invest in and think about this from the perspective of customers, suppliers, co-workers, team members and others. Designers get information from two aspects: Design reports and vendor interviews. (Of course, designers can also get information from users)

Reports usually come from customers, but they can also be collected by the designer from the vendor interview. It's a list of reasons to hire a designer and some suggestions for the problem. The report is a good way to collect information. It includes the brand image, technical conditions, expected timetable as well as the finished product, the project's detailed objectives and contact information of major suppliers.

In addition, in the report, designers often get the advice to get the project to succeed. This may not be listed, it may be in a 50-page file full of complex business and technical goals just empty talk, just like "We need new programs". However, but the designer to meet all the goals, but the design is more conservative, and did not meet the customer's "novelty" will, customers will not be happy.

The report should be just the starting point for the project. Indeed, the report could solve the problems raised. But what exactly does innovation mean? Where can I introduce a supplier interview? The supplier is the customer who has special interest in the project and can influence the result.

The interview (Figure 2.1) is usually the first task for a designer to do any project. In the interview, the client has the opportunity to tell the designer why this project is necessary. In the previous chapters, these reasons may be misunderstood and designers can communicate with them at any time. The problem may not be what the client imagines.

Figure 2.1 In the interview, the customer can explain the project objectives

Interviews are best for more people, so designers should consider the time needed to communicate well with them. Designers not only have to interview project sponsors (that is, people who provide money and resources), but also related personnel involved in the project. Usually, for a project, the underlying staff has a deeper perspective than the senior staff. Consider, for example, a process that involves reopening a customer's contact with a customer service department. Although the project is the responsibility of the supervisor, run by the Customer service department, if the designer does not chat with the specific staff, then they are dereliction of duty.

2.1 Business Objectives

Interaction designers have always been responsible for balancing business objectives with the needs of users, purchasing capacity and use goals. After that, we will consider the user, but now the interview is to tell the designer business objectives. The business goal is to achieve the abstract brand goal ("We need a more elegant interface") on hard terms ("we need 5 million of the input a Day"). But at the same time, designers must be very cautious. Find potential targets for the project. Sometimes, management wants to use the project for other purposes, such as merging two departments or increasing staff, and using design projects as a means. Solutions that disagree with potential goals may not be taken seriously.

By understanding business goals, designers should understand what the goals of a successful project should ultimately be ("we sell 10 million of the product every day"), and what is the measure of success of the project. Know the measure, can from the objective point of view, what kind of performance can be closer to success.

It is easier to measure success in terms of hard indicators than those for abstract purposes. Sometimes it is difficult to measure the interaction design with the rate of return (ROI). If the management expects the design to achieve the expected return, the designer needs to develop some mechanism before the design begins. Designers should extract some of the baseline criteria from the solution to measure the new design. For example, before you redesign a Web site's registration process, designers should have quantified data, that is to say: "Registration needs six minutes, whether user-friendly use of 1 to 5 levels, 5 level is excellent, the user currently registered rate of 2; According to the server log, half of the people stop registering on the second page. "At the end of the project, the designer measures the new solution against the baseline data, comparing the new and old data to the project's objectives." If the designer does a good job, the data will prove it.

2.2 Limiting factors

Interviews help designers understand the constraints of the project. Any project is subject to the conditions of business, technology, and time constraints. Constraints are generated by entities such as marketing, accounting, management, and information technology, and of course, users cannot be ignored. Sometimes the constraints are simple ("We want a website" or "We want a new mobile device"). Sometimes, the constraints are complex ("We sell the ads on each page, designed to take into account the design space for these ads" or "the robot can only turn left and occasionally explode"). In the course of the whole project, the interaction design should grasp the restrictive factors and make the interview notes into a frame chart. These factors can have an impact on design decisions.

Designers can sometimes overcome constraints, come up with ingenious solutions and break only one constraint, and then argue impassioned for his plan. For example, designers are working on a bank application study. In the course of the study, users reported that in order to make good decisions, users would be able to look at the balance on every page. But the technology is not up to this requirement. What does a designer do? Do you meet the needs of your users? I hope that the designers can argue and try to break the constraints.

2.3 Gather information

Unless expressly stated not to do so, the designer should be able to consult the source of the information at any time. Thanks to the internet, we can quickly collect information from different places. Designers should make good use of the Internet. Previous people did not think that the project is now limited to one area. Even a rough search of the internet, especially E-commerce mail folders, discussion boards, as well as technical and academic journals, whatever will be possible and project subject information.

Any doctoral student can prove that a person spends a lot of time collecting data. The most important thing is to collect information that is closely related to the solution, which is the key to solving the problem. The aim is to gather basic knowledge of the subject areas of the project (perhaps related fields), as well as expertise in solving specific problems. Interaction designers need to know not only what the problem is and what the problem is, but also why this problem is. Why use this method to solve the problem? Why is it important to sell 1 million a month? Why the mobile phone to use such a program. The cause of the problem helps the designer to know the answer to the problem without getting a lot of information.

It's a good idea to spend a certain amount of time collecting information. Finally, stop defining the project and start the real design.

3 Four ways of interactive design

Once the designer discovers the problem and identifies the key to the problem from several angles, the designer can begin to find the solution. There are four paths to find a solution. This has been used to design successful products, and designers will choose the most appropriate one. Some scenarios apply to all methods:

• They apply to many different situations, creating disparate products and services, from Web sites to electronic products to services that are not digitized.
• When you use at least one method, the most difficult situations can be improved.
• The best designers can use these methods flexibly and choose the best path, sometimes using multiple methods in a project.
• Individual designers are more inclined to use a certain method than others. Some methods are simple, but they don't feel right. Designers often feel they are hired because of the way they are used. In different things, it may be possible to use another method to better solve the problem. So, the interaction designer must know these four ways.

These four approaches are:

• User-centric design (UCD)
• Activity-centric design
• System Design
• Genius Design

Method	Summary	User	Designer
User-centric design	Focus on users ' needs and goals	Guide Design	Explore the needs and goals of users
Activity-centric design	Focus on tasks and actions	Complete the action	Creating Tools for Action
System Design	Focus on the various parts of the system	Purpose of establishing a system	Ensure all parts of the system are ready
Genius Design	Designers rely on skill and wisdom in designing products	Test inspiration	The source of Inspiration

Table 3.1 Four methods of design

We will describe each approach in detail, starting with the most popular user-centric design approach.

4 user-centric design

The concept of user-centric design is very simple, that is, users know what is the best product. People know their needs, goals and preferences by using products, which requires designers to design for them. When designing a service to promote coffee, you should first solicit the advice of those who drink coffee. The designer, though well-intentioned, cannot replace the user. Designers are helping users achieve their goals. Users need to participate in every stage of the design. Indeed, the user-centric design concept is to treat users as collaborators.

The user-centric design concept has been in place for a long time; it comes from industrial design and ergonomics, and it's simply that designers should make products fit for people, not people to get used to products. Industrial designer, an industrial designer who designed the 500 series of phones for the Bell Phone company, first proposed this approach when writing "design for People" in 1955. But at the same time, industrial designers keep in mind the fine tradition that software engineers have left behind, and for decades, they have enabled the software to function on a computer without making it fit for human use. For the sake of fairness, this is not all engineers ' fault; in the first 40 years because of the limited computational speed and storage capacity, and sometimes amazing, engineers can make computers become so useful. The limitations of the system are enormous. It takes so much effort and time to make the computer run correctly, which also causes the user to be neglected.

In the the 1980s, designers and computer scientists working in the field of human-machine interaction began questioning the interface that engineers designed for computer systems. With the enhancement of storage, processing and color display capabilities, a variety of interfaces has become possible, and a wave of the design of software, more and more attention to users, not computers. This wave is a user-centric design concept.

The goal is to be user-centric and important; the designer focuses on the needs of users. Designers determine the necessary tasks and methods to achieve these goals, but always think about the needs and preferences of users.

The best UCD approach is for designers to consider users at every stage. At the beginning of the project, the designer consults the user to see if the proposed project can meet the needs of the users. Designers conduct extensive research to determine the current user's goals. Then, when the designer develops a project-related model, they also consult with the user. Designers (often usability experts) test prototypes with the help of users.

In short, user data is a key element of design decisions in a project. When you do not know how to do, you can refer to the needs of the user. For example, if you are doing an E-commerce site, the user wants to put the button on the shopping cart in the upper right corner of the page, this button may eventually be placed in that position on the page.

The real purpose of users in UCD is difficult to define, especially for long-term purposes. Or they can't express their ideas so that designers have trouble designing products for them. Suppose design creates an application to help college students schedule. What is the purpose? To help students learn and live better in school? But why? So they can graduate? What was the purpose then? To get a good job? To be cultured? Designers will be confused by these endless purposes.

To put it another way, UCD is a MASTER DESIGNER. Don't impose your preferences on users, this should not be underestimated. Designers should discard their experiences and prejudices as others, in order to conflict with the needs of their users when designing products or services. UCD the DESIGNER to avoid the pitfalls. One design quote is "You are not a user." ”

The UCD does not always WORK however. All designs are dependent on the user sometimes a product or service is reluctantly paid attention to. For example, designers will also base their design on the wrong user data. To design products for thousands of people, UCD may be impractical. UCD is a valuable method, but it is only a design method.

5 activity-centric

The activity-centered design concept is not focused on the user's purpose and preferences, but on activities. Activities cannot be broadly defined as a set of actions and decisions for a plan. Activities can be short and simple (making sandwiches) or time-consuming and complex (learning a foreign language). The activity can be instantaneous, or it can be several years. You can do it alone, or you can work with other people, for example, when you sing. Some activities, such as taking money from ATM and getting money, are a fixed result. And listen to music there is no fixed result. The activity ends when the participant wants to stop (or some external factor).

Today, many of the products we use are based on activity-centric design, especially functional products such as electrical appliances and automobiles. Activity-centric design allows designers to focus on their hands and create product support for activities, rather than expecting more distant goals (Figure 5.1). Therefore, it is applicable to complex activities.

Fig. 5.1 The cello is a product designed for a special event: playing music

The intention of an activity is not to achieve the necessary purpose. Intention is more concentrated and more real than purpose. For example, the gardener may have a purpose (in order to have a neat courtyard), but the intent of the rake is simple: sweep the leaves.

Of course, sometimes the purpose and intent can be the same or similar. For example, the purpose and intention of making tea is almost the same: tea. Few people want to be a tea-making expert.

Activities are made up of actions and decisions. Designers call these tasks. The task can be simply pressing a button or a complex step like launching a nuclear bomb. The purpose of a task may be to engage in an activity (possibly complete). Each task is a moment in the activity. When considering buying a new game, you have the following tasks:

• decided to buy a new game
• decided to buy the game
• Decide where to buy
• If necessary, check the route to the store
• Go to the store
• Enter the store
• Found the game in the store.
• Pay the money
• Leave the Store
• Go home

This example shows that the distinction between tasks and activities can be quite subtle. Some of the tasks are clearly part of the activity. As an example of a phone call, one of the tasks is to find the number to dial. There are quite a few ways: call the pager, look for the phone book, recall the number, and so on. Each method of solving a problem is a task in itself. So is it a task or an activity to find the number? For designers, this difference is often biased towards theory.

Although there is no UCD so much emphasis on research, activity-centric design is also based on research. The designer's observations and interviews focus on the behavior of the user rather than their purpose. The designer catalogs the user's behavior, tasks, and unfinished tasks, and then designs the solution to help the user accomplish the task rather than what it is intended to achieve.

Ultimately, activity-centric design allows designers to focus on tasks and design products and services to support these tasks. The task "submit a form" may require a button to complete. The "Convert document" task may require a conversion program. This activity is not the activity that people are doing, but the activity that directs the design.

An activity-centric design can be used in theory. Designers should not overlook the need for skills and even superb skills in design choices. Remove or automate people's valuable skills in the face of ethical obstacles. For example, it may take weeks to learn the call center software. However, it is because of the design of coarse dryness that lead to waste of time. Designers are especially cautious about task automation; it's easy to lose skills, and some tasks may be tedious or difficult to learn, but it's delightful to perform. Imagine to design a piano that is easier to learn and play. We'll talk about ethics and design at the end, "designed products."

Another drawback of the activity-centric design is that the designer does not regard the problem as a whole when it comes to solving the problem with fixed tasks. They will see the forest in the trees. Here's an old design proverb: If you tell people that you want to design a vase or design a flowers product, you will get different results. With a focus on small tasks, designers will find that they have designed one vase after another, none of which is hanging.

6 System Design

System design is a kind of analytical method to solve the problem of design, it uses a limited component to solve design problems. In the user-centric design, the user is the center of the design process, and some entities interact with each other in the system. The system is not necessarily a computer. Systems can include people, equipment, machines, and objects. Everything from simple (heating systems in the house) to very complex (government-wide) things can be systems.

System design is an organized, rigorous design method that is ideal for dealing with complex problems and provides a comprehensive design approach. System design does not ignore the user's purpose and needs, which can be used to determine the purpose of the system. But in this approach, the user is emphasized in a background environment. Designers use system design to focus on user backgrounds, rather than individual objects and devices. System design is a rigorous study of the large background of the product or service.

System design is an overview of the system's due components: a purpose, a sensor, a comparator and an executing agency. The designer's job is to design these parts. In this way, the system design eliminates the guesswork and fuzziness of other methods, and provides a clear roadmap for designers.

The following is a typical example of a heating system to illustrate the main parts of any system (Figure 6.1).

FIG. 6.1 The system frame drawing of Hugh dubberly and Paul Pangaro in 2003

Goal: This is not the user's goal, but the goal of the entire system that can make sense from the user's goals. The goal is to state the perfect relationship between the system and the environment. In a heating system, one of the goals is to keep the indoor temperature at 72 degrees Fahrenheit.

Environment: where is the system located? Is it a digital, a similar product, or both? The house in the heating system is its environment.

Sensors: How does the system perceive changes in the environment? The temperature regulator and thermometer in the heating system (Fig 6.2) can do this.

disturbances: change is called interference, and some elements of the environment change the environment in two ways, anticipating and unexpected. Take the heating system for example, the temperature drop is interference. A lot of distractions happen in a flash.

Comparator: The comparator embodies the goal of the system. It compares the difference between the current state (the environment) and the ideal state (the goal). Any difference will be identified by the system as an error, and the system will correct the error. In the case of heating systems, the comparator can be a micro-computer or mercury switch that can be compared to the environment through the sensor (for example, "72 degrees ...)." 72 degrees ... 72 degrees ... 71 degrees ... 71 degrees ") and the system (" Keep at 72 degrees ") the difference between.

Actuator: When the sensor detects interference, the comparator finds the error and sends a command like the actuator (in this case, the boiler is the executing agency). The actuator can change the environment, that is to say, it can be heated.

Feedback: feedback is conditional on output. Feedback is a message that can be whether the target has been reached or stayed, or whether errors have been found. Take the heating system for example, the feedback is either the house temperature or 71 degrees, or has reached 72 degrees and to stop heating.

Controller: The controller is a part of the manual operating system (except for the environment). Take the heating system for example, you can use the controller to adjust to the desired temperature, you can also start the Executive Body to provide room heating.

Fig. 6.2 The temperature regulating device comprises a sensor, a comparator and an execution structure, which is controlled by a heating system

There are two types of disturbances in the environment that may affect our heating system. The first is expected disturbances, such as temperature periodically dropping. The second is unexpected interference, the temperature drop is beyond the expected range. This type of interference can cause the system to panic or program confusion. In heating systems, for example, sudden events can cause temperatures to drop by 100 degrees.

In order to eliminate the second type of interference (thereby making the system more stable), the system has to be diversified. The system should have a matching emergency device to cope with all kinds of situations. These responses can be a task error message ("You are sending 1 million e-mails"), and you can use the workaround ("You are sending 1 million e-mails.") I should delete them or I will send them in every 10,000 copies "), which will prevent system errors (all incoming messages are deleted when a certain number is exceeded). The system usually does not have a variety of error-correcting capabilities, which may be beneficial for prototypes, but not so good for air-traffic control systems.

Feedback is output from the system and indicates what just happened: the input is accepted by the environment, the comparator is changed, and so on. Every moment, you press a key, you can get the computer feedback. We'll talk about feedback in chapter three, but let's simply remember that when the system has no feedback, it will either not work or be in chaos.

The system is certainly not just a digital product. For example, most services are systems and contain digital and similar components. The coffee shop is full of sensors, comparators and actuators, and maybe you just think of them as employees in the store. However, designers of these examples in the design of objections and disgust systems. Many designers think that system design is inhuman, people as a machine component. In fact, system design is a very logical, analytical way to do interactive design.

However, opponents and distaste many designers are on the system design of the spring from just the example, like this. Many designers believe that system design is without dignity, and that turning people into robotic components is a very comprehensive arrangement. In fact, emotions, passions and strange ideas are not allowed in system design unless the interference in the environment needs to be eliminated. Someone yelling in the coffee shop is a big distraction!

The advantage of system design is that a project can be viewed comprehensively. After all, no products and services exist independently, and system design forces designers to consider the large environment on which products and services depend. Focusing on the interaction between the user and the various components, designers will be more aware of the environment around the products and services.

Hugh dubberly and system design:

Hugh dubberly

Hugh dubberly is dubberly Design Office ( DDO ) founder and chairman of the , is San Francisco Interactive design Advisor. Before setting up Ddo , he was Aol/netscape 's chief architect and Apple's creative director. He also teaches at San Jose National University and Stanford University.

What is System design:

System design is a simple design system. It means solving many scale and complex system problems in a systematic and rigorous way.

where does the system design come from?

System design first appeared in the short term before World War Two, engineers are dealing with complex communication and control problems. They complete their work with information theory, overall theory and cybernetics. In the the 1960s, some people developed this knowledge to the design field. The system is designed to flourish in a number of schools and computers that are interested in design. As an important legacy, system design is a design principle in the design theory, which uses system to make and citation design decisions.

What can a designer learn from system design?

Today, as more and more designers collaborate to design software and complex information spaces, design methods and system design are also more meaningful. The system design framework diagram is especially useful in shaping interactions and dialogs. For the design process itself is also meaningful.

What is most important in system design?

• A system approach needs to ask:
• What is the system for this situation?
• What is the environment?
• What is the goal of the system for this environment?
• What is the feedback loop that can make the system correct the error?
• How does the system detect whether it has achieved its purpose?
• Who will define the system, environment, goals, etc., and monitor it?
• What resources are there to maintain the relationship between systems?
• is the resources sufficient to satisfy the system's intentions?

System Design and UCD not compatible?

The system design method is completely user-oriented. In fact, the core of both approaches is to understand the user's goals. The system design approach focuses on the user's background and their interactions with the device, others, and themselves.

What is the relationship between system design and cybernetics?

Cybernetics (feedback Science) provides a system approach and a set of frameworks and tools. One of the most important ideas is:

• Define a system (subjectivity) from a trustworthy point of view.
• We are responsible for our actions (morality).
• All interactions are a form of dialogue.
• All dialogues involve goals, consensus and agreements.

is the system design sometimes inappropriate?

For large systems, system design is the most appropriate design method. These projects typically involve a large number of people from many disciplines who work together for a long time. They need tools to deal with the complexity of the project: clear goals, facilitate communication, and manage processes.

7 Genius Design

The fourth method of design, I call it genius design. Genius design relies almost entirely on the wisdom and experience of designers to make design decisions. Designers use their best judgment ability to get the user's needs, and then based on this judgment to design products. If users need to participate, generally in the design process later, the user to detect the work of designers to ensure that the design to achieve the desired purpose.

Compared with the other three design methods, genius design is almost arrogant. Today, many designers have done so, and Apple, for reasons of secrecy, has not done the necessary user research or testing. Many designers do not have the money and time to do the survey, so designers can only rely on their own solutions.

This is not to say that designers in the practice of genius design will not consider users. Only designers either don't have enough resources or are not inclined to involve users in the design process. Designers use their personal knowledge (and often organize knowledge from work and others to study knowledge) to determine the user's wants, needs, and expectations.

Genius involves creating some impressive designs, and it can also create some impressive glitches, such as Apple's first handheld device, Newton. Regardless of the market (not to be overlooked), the genius of success involves relying on the skills of a designer. As a result, gifted design is likely to be implemented by experienced designers who have encountered many problems and have learned from many past projects. If the designer is also a potential user, the product may be designed to be the best, although such an identity would be a serious flaw. Designers who create Windows 95 operating systems may think of themselves as users, but when they understand how the operating system works perfectly, ordinary users suffer. Designers know more about the product or service than most end users because they have an intimate knowledge of the products, services, and internal information they make in their decisions.

Unfortunately, although experienced designers can use genius design, some inexperienced designers are trying. For it is easier than the other three methods, many designers use this method. It is simpler than studying the components of a user or skilled aggregation system. Although I do not like to tell designers not to trust their intuition, be careful to practice the genius design, because intuition may be wrong.

Especially for an experienced designer, genius design has many advantages. This is a quick and personal way of working, and the final design may show the designer's talent more than any other method. This is the most flexible design method, designers think how appropriate to do. By following their own ideas, designers may want to be broader and more liberal in innovation.

8 Summary

Most designers have a preference for a method, although they are used in combination when designing. A designer's temperament, personal theory and working angle, as well as the users in the project to the design of the use of the method preferences. But the best designers can adjust the design method as the situation changes, so it's best to know these four methods.

Translated from "Designing_for_interaction"