The value of the interaction designer

Thinking about the position of interactive design

Many interaction designers, including user researchers, may have thought about one question: Is there value in the end? Is there a future for this profession? Finally, many interaction designers change careers as product managers or other jobs because they don't see the future or feel a sense of achievement.

Indeed, the prototype can be entirely done by the Product manager, it will not be able to copy the goods, no, can also give 10243.html "> Visual designers Free play." In this double whammy, the interaction designer is really embarrassed. Most depressing of all, interaction designers often do not have the right to speak, often need to compromise the product manager or leadership, even if the heart does not agree.

I have seen a microblog (which has now been removed) to the effect that: "Our company recruit product managers and artists, do not need interactive designers." We don't have to think about jobs that don't produce. Seemingly let the interaction designer chilling words, in fact, embodies the voice of many managers: interaction designers do not have much meaning, we do not want more such a useless link, no he is not a big deal, there is vision is enough.

I think it is a good thing to hear this voice, and it can make us more sober to reflect. A position exists, there must be a reason for its existence. What is the meaning of this position of interaction designer? How far should it be? Is it really like what this guy said? Only thinking without output? Let me briefly analyze it.

dispensable OR user experience Guardian? --balance between interaction designer and product manager

If you have read the elements of the user experience, you will know that the product at the strategic level (the elements of the user experience) needs to take into account both site objectives and user needs. In reality, product personnel tend to carry heavy KPIs, they are inevitably more concerned about site goals, and interaction designers are more inclined to stand in the user experience perspective of the problem. The two need to balance each other, check and balance, otherwise easy to lose control. Imagine, if there is no user experience or the corresponding team, the product in order to achieve their goals, it is likely to desperately increase the functionality and content. If people do not pay attention to experience, all to the transition of the consumption of products, the future of the product can be imagined (but this situation is basically only in large companies, products like a child, and product managers are the same as the parents of children. But the parents are too many, the child does not kiss.

One might say: Not all products are saddled with KPIs, nor are all product personnel paying attention to the user experience. Many product personnel draw their own prototypes are also very good. I would like to say that the operation of the industry has specialized, product personnel need to focus on the product's macro direction and positioning, rather than interactive details. How much can a product manager with a passion for interactive details and page layouts focus on the defining direction? (Unless this team has more product staff, some people are actually doing interactive work in full-time)

There is also a point, the designer generally does not carry KPI, so it is easy to maintain a more rational thinking, is the so-called "spectators." So we are always ready, in the product manager when the brain is hot (people in the face of great pressure, the designer is in fact the same), prepare a basin of cold water.

The enslaved prototype worker OR the designer who offers the best solution? --Cooperation between interaction designer and product manager

1. Identify the effectiveness of requirements

Every time a product throws up a demand, the mediocre designer wants to finish it; the average designer wants to do it well; The good designer is thinking of doing the best he can, and the great designer is giving priority to: is this demand not reasonable? Is it worth doing? What's the benefit of the product? Whether the user needs it, and so on. If the end result is that it is not worth doing, then you should reject it or suggest a better solution. Of course, it is very difficult to determine whether a particular demand is reasonable. In this case we can do user research, you can analyze the use of the scene, you can ask friends around, and product managers can discuss and so on, but can not give up thinking.

For example, when a colleague worked on a lottery client design, the product manager asked for more complex analytic charting (because it is often mentioned in user feedback). This time, we don't need to contemplate, looking for solutions to better present complex graphs on a small screen, but by analyzing the user's usage scenario, we end up with the conclusion that this feature does not apply to the handset client (there is no reasonable scenario for using the feature), Finally persuaded the product manager to cancel the function.

2. Reshaping demand

Unfortunately, most of the time the designer receives the requirement, the requirements document has been formed. This time the designer has been in a more passive position, and then will involuntarily according to the requirements of the document to design, until finally found out. This key node is precisely the place where designers can best play their value.

What we need more is the ability to turn an apple into an orange, rather than an apple, which you squeeze into apple juice. In that case, the day you are replaced is not far off, because the archetype will be painted.

For example, the requirements document stated that "level two navigation continues to be visible for easy user Switching." But you can hide it properly by experiencing or using research results and discovering that only a very small number of users will switch functions. In fact, you do not exactly according to the requirements of the document to do, but believe that the results, everyone will be satisfied.

3. Carding structure Flow & Design Interface

That's not much to say, an experienced professional interaction designer can use a short time to complete a reliable design; while the product personnel to do the prototype may be very quick, but the effect is difficult to be guaranteed (and thousands of people, if there is no professional interaction design principles, design norms to do guidance, Everyone can do it differently. Of course, you can end up with iterative iterations to achieve a better effect, but it may take a long time.

Many people feel that the whole process will be slow after joining the interaction designer. In fact, the overall time must be shorter (because of the reduction in design errors caused by the iteration). Of course the small team is not necessary.

I have encountered this situation: in the face of a very complex function, the product personnel spent several months of time and repeatedly carved carefully to do the prototype, and finally through the project team to implement the review. But after the final on-line effect is not good, the user is very puzzled do not know how to use, also do not understand what it means. I think this is because the product staff is too professional, too understand the complex use of the logic behind the product, but ignores the use of ordinary users habits. If in this process, there are professional interaction designers to join, I think will be a shorter time to achieve better results.

Short-sighted designer OR Visionary brand creator--the designer's understanding and shaping of brand

Designers actually have a very important role, that is to maintain and highlight the company's overall brand image. Product managers busy their own KPIs are busy, which have the time and mind to maintain unity with others ah. However, the user Experience team to be very strong to do AH.

Participants OR contributors to the project? --Interaction designer's impact on the project

1. Save other links of time, easier to achieve "specialization in the operation of the industry"

Saves the product personnel scratching the head to draw the prototype time; Saves the product personnel unceasingly to hit the wall, the time which repeatedly changes the prototype, has avoided the entire project because some obvious error causes the unnecessary iteration, has saved the user researcher to do the usability test the number of times (good interaction designer can discover most problems with the experience), Save the time and cost of usability testing; save time for visual designers to understand and fix 2B prototypes, save time for front end guessing incomplete prototypes, and save on development because of repeated changes in demand or interaction ...

2. Follow up each link to ensure the output material quantity

Although the Product manager is also responsible for follow-up, but a variety of functions, development problems have been very big, if the responsibility for follow-up design details, it would be a collapse. It doesn't matter, the interaction designer is your strong backing, follow the vision, the front end (of course, visual designer's follow-up is also very important), development, to ensure that the final line of the results and design of the same, give the product a better experience (pictures from Weibo, slightly modified).

3. Improve design quality and improve design efficiency.

After a period of accumulation, precipitation out design specifications or templates. Not only ensure the design quality, but also improve the design efficiency. Product personnel to do prototypes in the short term is indeed very fast, but because there is no uniform design standards, everyone's way of thinking is very different, if encountered personnel adjustment, it will be very troublesome. Of course, the most unlucky is development.

4. Make the project process more reasonable and more planning

If it is a large team, no interaction designers, or no knowledge of the interaction of people, the project process easily become confused. We are familiar with the following situations: The demand is not clear; the prototype is rough, the follow-up work is difficult, subsequent discovery problems lead to interactive changes, we rework together, the prototype description is incomplete, each of the following links in accordance with their own ideas building blocks, resulting in the product from the original goal is very far ...

And the interaction designer's appearance can improve this kind of situation to a certain extent: on the one hand, the interaction design itself has certain flow and method, can try to avoid everybody to clap brain to think the problem; In addition, the reliable prototype makes the process more orderly, the rework phenomenon will be greatly reduced.

5. Assists the product Manager to organize each link, is the entire project the powerful promotion.

Interactive designers to analyze and reshape demand, and with research to understand user characteristics and behavior, design structure, process, interface, dynamic effect, follow-up vision, front-end, development, timely finishing online problems, prepare for the next iteration ... This process can be said throughout the product cycle always, and he needs to deal with all aspects, communication and coordination, PK ideas. So a good interaction designer is the equivalent of a good housekeeper, helping the product manager organize all the links, and is a powerful catalyst for the whole project.

But the interaction designer still faces a big crisis.

Everything I said above is predicated on the assumption that:

If it's a small company or a small team, it doesn't really need interaction designers, because small teams communicate less cost, more agile and more efficient. Even if there are any problems can be quickly trial and error, rapid iteration, is the so-called "ship small good Turn". Interactive designers are more likely to play a role in large companies and large teams. Because large companies tend to move one and the whole body, more need to have a sense of risk; large companies have higher communication costs, need to organize the coordinator, big companies pay more attention to the brand image, large companies need to avoid the process of repeated, large companies need to consider the flow of personnel, timely precipitation methods and norms; big companies need to consider the professional ...

If I could have done what I said earlier, it would have been a perfect interaction designer. Unfortunately, 90% of interactive designers may not be able to do this. I do not know how many designers are still in the gap between the survival, looking at the product's face to live.

So if someone says that the interaction designer is useless and has no output, then we need to review the reason for ourselves: whether you went to a company that wasn't right for you, or that you didn't do enough work. Because in theory (as already proven), good interaction designers are very, very important.

What if there are no interactive designers?

The interaction designer, though important, is not to say that without him, the product will not survive. Many of the products I know do not have interactive designers, but still do well. In fact, understand does not understand the interaction may not be important, it is important that you have a love product heart, always remind yourself that "I am a user who do not know what", the brain is empty, and then go to the real experience of your products, I believe you can do well. However, unfortunately, in large companies, such a small number of people (Division of labor meticulous, it is difficult to really care about the product or responsibility), even if there is such a person, may not be able to make decisions on products.

SOURCE Address: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s ... 01017tok.html