Design thinking: Can not only consider to meet user needs

Intermediary transaction SEO diagnosis Taobao guest Cloud host technology Hall

"Editor's note" the author of this article @ a dirt thief, design thinking is an idea that the focus is no longer "use" itself, but by understanding the user's intrinsic mental model, the user's environment, and observing the use behavior under the dual action of the mental model and the environment, To design a product that really fits into their lives and depends on them. Described in simple words, design thinking not only think about how users use, but also understand the users themselves and their environment.

-–not only to understand arranges's activities, also more importantly to understand arranges and misspelling the context (internally and Externally) of those activities.

Why does design thinking more attention to people and their environment than to direct use?

The person and his behavior are connected by context, and he chooses to start the behavior only if it is based on a context. And this context is divided into internal and external, internal refers to the internal drive and natural attributes of the human, external refers to its environment.

Give an example:

Scene: Everyone was having a focused discussion, and my cell phone rang.

Drove me to the receiver. The context of this behavior is:

Inner: My judgment on the importance of this call, my experience of not answering the phone and causing consequences;

external: I do or do not do this behavior on the current environment, the impact of this effect on my influence is, etc.

The internal and external double function finally determines whether I carry out such activities. If my judgment in the context is: this is an open environment, no one will care if you are in the middle of a call, and if my judgment on the inner context is based on the consequences of not answering the phone last time, I'll take it. Then I might have answered the phone.

In another case, we compare the influence of internal and external contexts: if the external context is more influential than the internal--even if I don't answer the phone, the consequences will not be worse than the phone, because the boss is scolding everyone, then I will not take this call.

Conversely, if the caller is an important customer and is directly concerned with the progress of the project, maybe I will take the call even if the external context is the Boss's talk.

Design thinking that if you pay close attention to behavior without paying attention to the internal and external contexts in which people perform this behavior, the big possibility is that we only focus on "How to use", and a user depends on and favorite products, "How to use" is often the last step, more importantly, "who will use", "Why Use", " When and where to use ".

What do you mean by product design?

Products are the integration of a number of user behavior, whether the user can use the product, depending on the product can provide a combination of behavior, in the user "intrinsic" and "external" context to find "I want to use" conclusion. Take Apple as an example:

Apple's failure is that they haven't found enough people to find the "I want to" conclusion in their "inner" and "external" contexts. Apple's failure is a period of explosive growth in the information consumption market, and the explosion foundation of the information consumption market is a huge and standardized software and hardware market; Apple's approach during this period was that Aza Raskin recalled his father Jfe Raskin, who was involved in the design of the first generation of Macintosh, quotes a memoir from Stanford's Computer history:

There were to is no peripheral slots so this customers implies had to the inside of the machine (although external, ports would be provided); There is a fixed memory size so this all applications would run on all Macintoshes; The screen, keyboard, and mass storage device (and, we hoped, a printer) were to is built in so this customer got a truly comple Te system, and so we could control the appearance of characters and graphics.

This integration, high integration, open, incompatible design is at odds with the backward compatibility concept that Microsoft has always maintained. Under this design concept, when the vast majority of consumers, to maintain a state of thirst for information consumption, both internal and external context is not enough to support enough consumers to choose the "use of apple" behavior.

However, the error in the business perspective does not mean that the design angle is useless, it's just that Apple's paranoia has been focused on an unopened market, or a particular territory buried deep within the user context--I focus on the value that the tool can produce and how comfortable it is, rather than letting people know how many tools I have.

When the thought of this deeply buried for many years slowly becomes the essence of most people, it naturally translates into an external context--information consumption is a small part of life, I just need a box, I tell it to me what, it can give me, as for other I do not care, it is so simple.

Until now, Apple has maintained this obsession with functional quality--the quality of open programs on the Androping platform cannot be compared to Apple apps. This paranoia is still based on an assumption of the user context that our design enables the target consumer group to find the "I want to" conclusion in its "inner" and "external" contexts.

Isn't that what users need to design?

Indeed, in essence, the ultimate goal of designing a product is still to meet the needs of the user. But the definition of "satisfying demand" has changed quite a lot--when we face a large number of user groups, the need for complexity beyond imagination, and definitely not a paper demand list can be solved.

The prevalence of consumerism nourishes the all-inclusive style of product design. This style is a very ingenious and inexpensive design in the context of consumerism-the more I offer, the more satisfied you are, I don't care what you need. So "multi-functional" became the key word of product design of that time.

After the Pareto principle theory (80/20 theory) has spawned a rethink of too many useless functions, and the focus on product design has shifted more to the user experience (the experience is different from the experience, the latter is more extensive, the former is more concerned about the function itself), and this is coping with a personality era ( Including the popularity of minimalism), more modernist trend of thought at the beginning of the personal experience of the promotion also began to introduce into the SOFTWARE product design. So this era of product design keyword into "customizable", "My Exclusive", "ease of use", "simplicity."

At the very least, both design ideas are still avoiding excessive attention to functionality--the first thought that many and wide functions could be used by users, and the second thought that fewer and better features were available to users. It is the fact that meeting the needs of users does not mean that users will use them. The ability to drive users around within and outside the context of user and behavior.

And this is the core of design thinking different from the traditional method--to satisfy the user's needs can not directly lead to the success of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, the analysis of the context that drives the user to use the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is the key of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT success.

What is the design thinking?

Design Thinking's classic thinking mode has the following:

Empathy (Empathy)

The core of design thinking is the user's use of the context of the software product, empathy helps the designer to transfer the emotion to the object user, to understand the user's natural attributes, social status, growth environment, life habit, etc., understanding its internal and external questions Thus understanding what drives them to produce the behavior of using the product;

Experimental doctrine

The purpose of design thinking is "Build to architecture" to build, the process should be cut into more small experimental units, rapid generation of experimental prototypes (such as sketch, Storyboard and wireframes) and anything that is produced in the design process should be quickly discarded as a laboratory product;

Short feedback loop

Design thinking need a shorter feedback loop, and any activity and decision in the process should be validated and improved in a shorter feedback cycle;

Spirit of cooperation

Design thinking is the art of cooperation, please welcome innovators from different backgrounds and create a working environment that encourages cooperative innovation.

Original link: http://www.tuzei8.com/2011/04/xd%e5%85%b3%e9%94%ae%e5%ad%971%ef%bc%9adesign-thinking/