Showing posts with label interaction design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interaction design. Show all posts

Sunday, February 27, 2011

10 things users don't know about UX (and where to find them).

UX is trendy. UX is topical.

Let’s gather a little background on UX growth and the exploding trend using some readily available corollaries - free internet statistics. First lets look at Google Trends to understand the overall use of user experience in stories and articles and how that corresponds to growth in search terms and use.

Growth exploded in the latter half of 2010 and there are already exponential indicators for 2011.

Now let’s take a look at the jobs market as it relates to the need for user experience, as found in job descriptions being posted on the internet.

Nearly 5% of all jobs posted mention user experience.

Finally let’s take a look at one of the web-based communities and UX associations to see how the trends are unfolding there. IxDA now has over 24,000 members and there are currently more than 1,000 UX jobs posted on their job boards.

Job postings for UX on IXDA have grown to the point where members
demanded a separate forum for them and IXDA is effectively
monetizing the trend with 90-day ad placements..
Why is UX trending up?
The short answer here is because it's expensive to launch products and services that fail.  And that failure is becoming more commonplace when user demands for social interaction, simplicity and intuitive use are not met.  There is naturally going to be a certain amount of hype generated by pent up demand to raise a collective toast to great experiences. This same trend emerges in the way we share Superbowl ads and talk about good brand advertising or add our voice to recommendations for restaurants or books online. It is not hype for a user to expect a great experience.  It is not hype when business leaders build pragmatic cases to understand ROI prior to heavier upfront investments in technology projects.  It is not hype when former design snobs open the door to collaboration and discussion as broader team members. The link in the previous sentence takes you to a recent article in UXMag that pointed to an interesting opportunity that exists in the UX practice now to properly align to the broader impetus around customer experience and to formalize how the practices interlock. When we peel back this onion, what we do find is that there are some more thoughtful leaders trying to level-set expectations on what it means to be user-centric.

There is a shared expectation in place today that an investment in user experience will result in the following areas of research and discipline being applied against a project.  There may be some unresolved issues in certain project types relative to upfront investment amounts but at minimum we need to synthesize user knowledge into usable design and measure the usage in order to understand adoption.

  1. User research – appropriate definition of target and impacted users and their frustrations, desires, needs and goals with both current and desire state.

  2. Personas and use cases – the amalgamation of the audience types identified in the research constrained into usable, useful, coherent identities that can be used to map features, prioritization and scenarios to situations. 

  3. Design and design thinking – the use of design to drive iteration in the project and to clarify outcomes to all stakeholders, as well as final form factor for the deliverables.

  4. Optimization – learning from behavior, usability testing, A/B design and offer testing and other data inputs and outputs that support the design thesis and inform successful adoption and satisfaction.
The question is, where else do we need to look in order to truly understand the delivery of a great experience. What other resources and inputs provide an equally pragmatic POV to users when properly engaged? Where can we draw on information that lends itself to inspiration?

A recent Gizmodo post featured a somewhat familiar video under the headline, “In Praise Of The People Who Make Gadgets Worth Using”. From a first mile (outside-in way of saying ‘last mile’) perspective, UX professionals may in fact be responsible for the ‘joy of using’ part, but the ‘worth’ part comes from a lot of disciplines and a lot of contributors to the overall promise being made by a brand which has embraced the provision of a category-leading digital experience.

But there are at least 10 more contributing, pragmatic, non-user inputs that support the story being told and ultimately inform decisions that need to be made. In fact, one could argue that these are just as critical to the success of any project built with the user in mind, since the conversation and actions that are being undertaken are critical to many areas of the business that go well beyond the success of the project or application being built.
  1. Marketing – the role of the experience is generally going to be inclusive of offers and programs that are part of how the brand markets itself. Beyond brand impressions, this is often the primary intended action as either acquisition or loyalty unless the product is an online service itself.

  2. The business goal – tension between user goals and business goals is ratified to common ground in order to meet the unique needs of both participants in an experience.  Beyond the user needs for the service or product itself, this may add unique needs for social interaction, service dialogue or transaction capabilities in the delivery of the interfaces provided.

  3. The competition – what others in the field are doing. It’s important when we look at competition that we look at anything and everything that is competing for attention, not just direct competition. For example, when people are thinking about investing, they are not only thinking about investment banking.  Look at all the areas people invest in and see what is currently capturing passion, mindshare and the attention of your desired constituent.

  4. What users already like and use – what people know about and do already is often the inverse of the above, especially in the case of a new product or way of delivering service. By understanding the why and what of where your target audience is spending their time, you can better inform the decisions you need to make. This, like some of the other areas, may be covered by user research but too often this is narrowly focused on ‘what they use that you provide.' Motivational design and game theory may both apply here, but the point is not so much the design as the business and market trends that support decisions that you will make.

  5. The glass – We use the glass as a metaphor for the device or system that user will consume the experience on, and to capture and relate the constraints and affordances of the target environment. How can effectively persist context, history, profile and preference across multiple devices and screens? How do you prioritize the most common and lead into the next wave effectively?  This is not so much a question of screen size and pixel depth as it is a question of task and context.

  6. The platform – the complexity of back-end systems, their limited capabilities for great experience and business processes that they are built to support are at least in part why you are here. The bad news is that you can’t ignore them. The good news is that you can make them better. A good metaphor for this was discussed recently on Twitter - that experiences are akin to the razor market. UX (design) and the associated experiences are disposable – used temporarily, rapidly dulling and constantly changing. This is how digital agencies make money and how Adobe makes tools revenue in the category. UX (experience) and the associated systems and processes are more permanent - these are constraints and enablers and require the right adapter/configuration in order to use the design. As an example, it is this the sum of these parts make up the enterprise UX business as it relates to Adobe's focus on customer experience management.

  7. The domain – domain-driven design actually surfaced as a technology approach to enabling better user experiences during the industry’s learning years. While it does not solve everything, what we do know is that the inference of domain is critical, and that the informed separation of domain from service and interface requires that you represent domain effectively. Some platform and tools providers infer this as a pattern and best practice.  IT teams have deep knowledge of the domain model and its association to underlying systems and should be the core contributor to this knowledge.  The consumerization of IT may lend itself to some rethinking of domain models, but that does not mean they are gone.

  8. Data – data is the interface and data absolutely informs the interface. Historical, competitive, industry, market, geography, audience and technology trends are all surfaced as data that can be used along with your own analytics to drive broader insight about the conditions your new design will exist within. Embrace it, live with it, learn from it, and consume it continuously, especially after launch. Then share it with everyone who is a stakeholder in order to maximize learning and inputs into the final form factor.

  9. The world around you – Close your laptop lid and go for a walk. Visit a gallery. Attend a wellness conference. See a movie. What are people doing, reading, studying, watching, visiting and talking about? What commonalities in these shared experiences can you extrapolate to your audience and desired outcomes? What persistent affordances cross over into your world in a way that will both inform and prepare your customers for your leg of the journey?

  10. The designer's body of work – You are, or have hired, some brilliant designers. These brilliant designers are focused on transforming digital experiences based on two key inputs – everything you know or can learn about the project AND who they are and their past experience and knowledge. Today’s UX designers understand layout, color, brand, interaction, information architecture and even the constraints of development. Armed with these tools, their magic is going to play a big part in finding the right path, and we can benefit from some pure, unfettered ideation that borrows on the wealth of education and experience that is hiding in their portfolio. What we do know is that designers all appreciate great UX and that users increasingly appreciate the source of great experience.

This is by no means meant to be an exhaustive list – nor does the list preclude that users or user experience professionals will often have knowledge of some of the workings in specific areas - the intent was to both push a little on the realities behind UX trend that favor design and usability in order to inform the overall discovery of requirements.

If I had one question of readers, it would be where do you find your inspiration and logic outside of the design process?  Or, perhaps when is user-centric too user-centric?

Sunday, September 26, 2010

KPIs for Great Experiences

Educating and equipping yourself and your existing organization to build great experiences and set KPIs for how those experiences are rendered and consumed requires some faith in your own R&DIY methodology - Research and Develop It Yourself.  Even for organizations with no intention of building teams with dedicated user experience skills, it is necessary to have some framework for stakeholders in any project to evaluate skills, work plans, resource models, wireframes and other artefacts of the user experience outcomes and process. 

I would encourage anyone thinking about this for the first time to stretch your mind a bit - often new methodologies that can bring considerable benefit don't work right away simply because organizations and individuals hold onto beliefs, practices and organizational paradigms that no longer fit the modern software development process.  So here are 10 things that I am confident everyone will benefit from and that will light the path to better customer experiences. There are some specific focus areas for each theme as well as some ideas for key user-centric KPIs that you can set for each.

1. Branding
User Experience is the front-facing evidence of a true focus on great customer experience.  Some people interchange UX with brand as it relates to interfaces on the web, essentially acknowledging that brand is something we influence in everything we do. The brand becomes an experience when designers wrap the online or in-store presence of an institution or organization in the promise of the brand and this powerful reality can lead to both good and bad brand experience.  A positive user experience has a direct correlation to positive brand perception. Authors such as Dirk Knemeyer who has worked on software design for Microsoft, Apple, Oracle and many other well known brands, expanded on this theme recognizing that both online and offline customer experiences contribute to brand image and \highlighting the importance of consistency between the customer experience across all touch-points.  Therefore working from the premise that an organization engages in a broad, complex set of interactions with its customers, of which the brand experience portrayed through its websites and applications is only one.  At minimum here, we need to verify that:
a.   The system provides all types of visitors, customers and employees with an engaging and memorable experience.
b.   The visual impact of the system is consistent with the brand identity and actually delivers on the learned and trusted promise of the brand.
c.   The system leverages the capabilities of the internet or application in order to enhance or extend the promise, values and mission of the brand.

Example Branding KPIs - Brand affinity, brand awareness, referral, comment/rating, sentiment, NetPromoter



2. Functionality
Less may in fact be more, but simple is never simple.  This subjective evaluation that drives a lot of application and online thinking needs to consider the goals of both the user and the business, and needs to reflect the capabilities and policies (e.g. security, privacy) of the IT organization responsible for deploying and managing the application.  When building interaction based on functions we should strive to minimize the cognitive load required to absorb information and complete tasks.  One way to think about this is to understand how much concentration the task requires to complete. A good way to reduce the amount of ‘thinking work’ the user has to do is to focus on what the computer is good at and build a system that uses the computers skills to the best of its abilities. To optimize interaction with sophisticated functionality consider the following key attributes of a system or application:
a.   The system helps its visitors accomplish common goals and tasks.
b.   Online functions are integrated seamlessly with both real-time data and transactions as well as offline or asynchronous business processes.
c.   Can users apply knowledge that they might have gained from using other sites or in-person situations?
d.   Accelerators—unseen by the novice user—may often speed up the deployment of an application and introduce best practices that cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Can a one size fits all approach be used?  Can you extend systems and products in such a way to specifically target your use cases?
e.   Visibility of both system health and progress allows you to keep users informed about what is going on at all times and reduces abandonment during issues that may be out of their, or even your, control.  Ensure that task progress is clearly communicated at all stages.

Example KPIs for functionality - Adoption, abandon rates, customer service escalations, social feedback

3. Visual Delight
The balance between psychology, human factors, HCI (human computer interaction) and the magic of design is all based on one common principle, the notion that people want to be engaged by the things that they do.  People may learn in different ways, keep track of tasks in different ways but there is a fundamental need to be and feel immersed in experiences.  In a world of constant distractions, it is no small feat any longer to stay focused on tasks.  How well they can do that is a reflection of design, not just the design of the system or process they are engaging with, but also the surrounding distractions and plethora of options that are often unnecessarily pushed into interfaces.  Bear in mind that personalization can enhance the impact of design - allowing users to customize presentation maximizes utility to them.  Site design should accommodate personalization and utility, not force users to accommodate the design.  While design and engagement are subjective and need to reflect both brand and functionality as outlined above, we can do a few basic checks to ensure we are on the right path, such as:
a.  All graphics and multimedia add value to the specific experience or potential adoption of a system or tool. Engage and guide user's eye, mind and navigational system appropriately.
b.  Page length, content depth and screen elements are relevant to the task at hand - such as providing data visualizations to aid decision-making or help content and comparisons to help with product selection and configuration.
c.  Does the application use standard iconography and adhere to brand guidelines, as well as style guides that may be in use across other interaction points in both the organization or even the industry in general?
d.  Remember, not everyone gets visually engaged and that there are myriad forms of difficulty people may have with complex interfaces.  Balance the need to engage and delight with a practical approach to accessibility and use of standards.

Example KPIs for Visual Delight - Adoption, abandonment, page depth, time on site, transaction success, transaction times

4. Navigation
Now that we have some of the basics in place it's time to tackle the difficult tasks of information architecture, interaction design and navigational tools in order to shorten the distance between users and their goals.  Someone once said that architecture is 80% of usability - whether or not that is true is irrelevant to users but what they do know is that if they cant find what they are looking for, then it doesn't work. The Pareto principle is that oft repeated gem that informs us that 20% of the functionality is used 80% of the time - some people interpret this as 80% of people only ever use 20% of the features. Therefore we should make the most common or important functions easiest to find.  In various studies it has been proven that problems with navigation can be the #1 reason for abandoning transactions or support requests online, resulting in costly interactions with frustrated users to solve problems they should have been able to tackle on their own.  While this is a matter of much debate, and many experts weigh in with different approaches, there are some fundamental points that are universal to how we navigate applications and websites.  Consider the following:
a.   Is there a convenient, obvious way to switch between related pages or different sections based on an efficient navigational paradigm?
b.  Are you using any unknown, non-standard keyboard shortcuts?  Education is in order.
c.   Minimize user 'wet memory' load (brainpower requirement) by making all objects, actions, and options appropriately visible and reflective of their significance.
d.   Have you provided easy entry into the system and are fundamental links obvious in their intent and destination?
e.   Can a user get help quickly and efficiently, perhaps even collaboratively within the session?
g.   Have you given users freedom?  Do you support undo, redo, go back and reset appropriately and with safeguards in place to prevent loss of effort?
h.   DO you aggressively monitor traffic through your system. Which pages pique user interest? Which pages make users leave? Adjust your system accordingly.

Example KPIs for Navigation - Purchase, registration, page depth, time on page, time on site, path through site, adoption, abandonment, social feedback

5. Consistency
This is harder than it sounds.  To tackle consistency let's look at the sources of inconsistency.  Acquisitions often result in different product/service lines being represented, voiced and navigated differently.  Pre-registration (marketing) and post-registration (business process) applications are often broken into silo'd operations and this can result in confusion right at the point of transaction.  The need to release projects at different times can also result in inconsistencies across everything from brand to content presentation to navigation.  The source of inconsistency is valid.  The challenge is keeping a unified approach to how we present ourselves to users, and this is hard enough with a single project.  Maintaining consistency ensures that users learn and adopt more quickly and can apply learning to one part of the application based on their prior experiences from another.  We should use inconsistency only where users will clearly understand that things do not work the way they might expect.  How do we tackle this?
a.  Know the user (YOU are not the user)  and ensure that interfaces conform to user-centric and goal-oriented tasks.
b. Provide constant hints and reassurances that the current user is in fact the intended audience.
b. Speak from the outside in, in the users' language, rather than system-oriented terms.
c.  Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, elements or actions mean the same thing.
d.  Consider earlier areas like navigation and brand.
e.  Help users understand not only what the can and should do, but what they cannot do.

Example KPIs for Consistency - Success rate, abandon rate, support escalation, social feedback

6. Content
Sweat the small things.  This is a big area.  Well presented content is the exception rather than the rule simply because it is hard to do. Also many teams do not recognize the value of investing in a great copywriter or strong multi-media (lean-back) content.  The reality is that people wspend an overwhelming amount of their online time reading words on a page. On a PAGE - it is no accident that we refer to them as pages.  You need to adopt, develop or use a style guide in order to codify the rules and standards that are right for you.  You need to make several key decisions - languages and grammar, editorial voice, column layout, font, image handling, media handling, page depth/length, above and below the fold, the ability to rate or interact or share content and the ability to print for example, but most importantly you need to determine how to best present it based on your user's goals in order to get the right content to the reader as quickly as possible and in the most easily consumable manner.  Here are a few general themes that are must-haves:
a.   Content is appropriate to customer needs and business goals and help user to make a decision.
b.   Content is complete, up-to-date, accurate, with no redundancy.
c. Content, media, navigation and transactional capabilities work as an integrated whole
d. Nothing is included that is irrelevant.
e. Tags, keywords, categories and subheads are distinctive, descriptive, balanced and easily findable.
f.   Content across multiple languages is comprehensive.
g. Search works!  Do not underestimate the effort required or the power of getting search right on your site or within your application.

According to the W3C guidelines/standards for content, content should be:

    •    Perceivable – Information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive
    •    Operable – User interface components and navigation must be operable
    •    Understandable – Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable
    •    Robust – Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies (see Accessibility below)

Example KPIs for content - Engagement, time on article, sharing, social feedback, purchase/conversion, site path optimization

7. Performance
Scalability, availability, load times, wait times and how these are represented to the user ultimately determine if users refer to your site as 'slow and annoying' or 'awesome and easy' - great performance empowers users to give you great feedback and ensures that you are always on and building trust and credibility with your users.  This is ultimately an IT task as it relates to network, server horsepower, application server choices, etc but a lot of performance issues can be introduced by content owners and designers.  Two simple rules to observe from a user POV are:
a.   Does the system perform fast enough for users and when it is not performing correctly do you have a way to let them know what the problem is?
b.  Are all load times appropriate to the value of content, even on a slower connections - or do you provide specific services to those with slower connections?

KPIs for Performance - page/application loads, load time, simultaneous users, transaction processing time, abandons, feedback

8. Error handling
Well-written, helpful error messages are crucial to a quality user experience. Poorly written error messages result in low product satisfaction, and are a leading cause of avoidable technical support costs. First and foremost there are essentially two types of errors - system errors and user errors - and we should group our work into the functional areas of error prevention, detection and recovery.  You, the designer and developer, are ultimately responsible for how these are put in place.  Also there are two types of messages that happen when an error takes place - error messages and warning messages. An error message alerts users of a problem that has already occurred. By contrast, a warning message alerts users of a condition that might cause a problem in the future. Error messages can be presented using modal dialog boxes, in-place messages, notifications, or balloons.  Effective error messages inform users that a problem occurred, explain why it happened, and provide a solution so users can fix the problem. Users should either perform an action or change their behavior as the result of an error message.  Consider:
a.   Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action.
b.   How are you capturing user error levels, breakpoints, feedback and assessing that information and acting on it?
c.   Can a user recover all by themselves? What do users have to do to recover from errors? For example, Error messages should actually mean something to the user and tell the user how to fix the problem.

Microsoft and many other software developers have already put an extraordinary amount of effort into this space and we can learn from some best practices in the packaged application world to help us sort out graceful handling of errors.

    •    Is the user interface (UI) presenting a problem that has already occurred?  If not, the message isn't an error. If the user being alerted of a condition that might cause a problem in the future, use a warning message.
    •    Can the problem be prevented without causing confusion? If so, prevent the problem instead. For example, use controls that are constrained to valid values instead of using unconstrained controls that may require error messages. Also, disable controls when clicking would result in error, as long as it's obvious why the control is disabled.
    •    Can the problem be corrected automatically? If so, handle the problem and suppress the error message.
    •    Are users likely to perform an action or change their behavior as the result of the message? If not, the condition doesn't justify interrupting the user so it's better to suppress the error.
    •    Is the problem relevant when users are actively using other programs? If so, consider showing the problem using a notification area icon.
    •    Is the problem not related to the current user activity, does it not require immediate user action, and can users freely ignore it? If so, use an action failure notification instead.
    •    Does the problem relate to the status of a background task within a primary window? If so, consider showing the problem using a status bar.
    •    Are the primary target users IT professionals? If so, consider using an alternative feedback mechanism, such as log file entries or e-mail alerts. IT professionals strongly prefer log files for non-critical information.

KPIs for Errors - number of errors, time to error, recovery from error, abandon rate, customer service escalation reductions, social feedback, success rates


9. Accessibility
When we build interfaces it is important that we use systems to display information in the way that it was originally intended, to encode meaning rather than specifically focusing on appearance. Jakob Neilsen has long been a proponent of the theory that as long as a page is coded for meaning, it is possible for alternative browsers to present that meaning in ways that are optimized for the abilities of individual users and thus facilitate the use of the Web by disabled users.  Bear in mind though that buildings still have stairs, that is to say that it is probably best if you can optimize your onramps and sites for different types of users with different types of limitations, while still maintaining a high fidelity and optimal experience for users without these challenges.  It is a matter of balance and preference, but an interface that has been optimized for every possible use case is probably not ideal for any one type.  Some simple and basic rules to follow are:
a. Check and understand any legislation impacting your presence and be sure to comply with that
b. Study and understand the various challenges users may have, and how they overcome them, and use that information to guide your ability to help them further.
a.   Know the technology limitations: Identify and optimize for target browsers and user hardware.
b.  Think about adding collaboration or live help features if possible to ensure an optimal experience in the event of a problem or barrier that is unforeseen.
c.   Remember that not all disabilities impact users the same way or to the same degrees, for some users being able to magnify type might be enough, for others you need to be sure your site or applications work with the major screenreaders.
d. Allow users to customize presentation, without destroying the usability of the content.
e. Text is used to convey information rather than images of text.

KPIs for Accessibility - all KPIs so far as it pertains to unique audience requirements, compliance to standards

10. Help and documentation
I deliberately left it last to make a point - people always leave it until the end - and often don't spend enough time on it at all.  Ideally a system and the model for interaction should be discoverable and if it is based on common metaphors for navigation and interaction and follows the first 9 guidelines effectively users may never have a problem but you still need to be prepared for this.  For your organization it is an insurance policy on usability, and its also a great way to verify that a system works the way it was intended.  If the help file sounds too complicated, the system likely is too complicated. 
a.   Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.
b.  Any information required in order to make a decision needs to be there when the decision is being made.
b.   Any documentation should be findable, searchable and written in neutral form.
c. Focus on the user's task not how the system works
d. List concrete steps to be carried out and help users understand at all times where they are in the journey

KPIs for Help and Docs - users helping themselves, users helping others, customer service escalations, social feedback

You may also want to better understand UX theories such as affordance which is essentially the quality of something that tells us or hints as to it's function and interaction model, or more sophisticated theories such as hierarchy of control or Fitts' Law which both have to do with the controls for an object and how we interact with them through mouse or touch or other means.  Once you are on the right path with the functions, design, brand and other key aspects of your application it makes sense to dig deeper into the patterns of interaction and controls that you are surfacing and start thinking about how to standardize them.

Growth in the user experience space and attention to the craft continues to grow.  I constantly find new folks to follow on Twitter, the discussion continues to flood my inbox, there are constantly new topics springing up in the IxDA forums, and more and more enterprise project discussions are revolving around the end user goals.  The job boards are also lighting up and this is fuelling even more interest in education, books and ways that people can get started in or transition their careers to a focus on user experience.  A lot of these discussions around acquiring skills lead to comparisons of education institutions but many of them also point to a few of the key thought leaders in this space.

No newbie to this space could go wrong understanding two critical thinkers in this space in order to get a grasp on the depth of information and help that is available and to understand some of the fundamentals.  Alan Cooper and Peter Morville, in order to help a get a grip on the basics.  Interaction design, information architecture and usability are essentially the fundamentals of user experience and as three key focus areas they complement each other to

Alan Cooper - Twitter - Interaction Design
An advocate of interaction design and agile methodologies, Alan runs cooper and writes books such as The Inmates Are Running The Asylum and the About Face series, which are mostly about how to make software user interfaces address user's goals. Cooper is sometimes called "the father of Visual Basic", and was the leading force behind Visual Basic 1.0, pioneering the use of an IDE to create a GUI via wrapped calls to system routines in the API (this is now referred to as the Adapter pattern).  Check out his blog for a rich history of the world of Interaction Design as many have come to know it.

I had the pleasure of working with Alan and his team when I was in product strategy at Yahoo! on a very interesting project - essentially thinking about design tools for designers and advertising tools for agencies.  Together with members of my team who were driving the project, we mapped out the entire agency ecosystem and actually built persona of the people that generally build persona.  Alan's iterative workstyle and deep insight provided the frank picture of opportunity that we needed to progress the business.  One of my favorite presentations from Alan is located here - The Wisdom of Experience.

Peter Morville - Twitter - Information Architecture
Peter Morville is president and founder of Semantic Studios, a leading information architecture, user experience, and findability consultancy.  He is probably best known for helping to create the discipline of information architecture as we know it, and he is a tireless advocate for the critical roles that credibility, findability, trust and other human desires play in defining user experience.  Peter's new book Search Patterns (co-created with Jeffery Callender) illustrates patterns of behavior and design across the categories of web, e-commerce, enterprise, desktop, mobile, social, and covers such diverse topics as relevance ranking, faceted navigation, multi-touch, and augmented reality.  Peter is a founder and past president of the IA Institute and serves on the advisory boards of Rosenfeld Media, Faz, Clueray, the Journal of IA, the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Interaction-Design.org, and Project Information Literacy.

Morville's honeycomb serves as both a companion and checklist for making great experiences.

honeycromb – Peter Morville
Peter Morville (P.Morville – Facets of the User Experience)
Let's take a look at how Peter explains the 7 facets of the UX honeycomb:

    •    Useful. As practitioners, we can't be content to paint within the lines drawn by managers. We must have the courage and creativity to ask whether our products and systems are useful, and to apply our deep knowledge of craft and medium to define innovative solutions that are more useful.
    •    Usable. Ease of use remains vital, and yet the interface-centered methods and perspectives of human-computer interaction do not address all dimensions of web design. In short, usability is necessary but not sufficient.
    •    Desirable. Our quest for efficiency must be tempered by an appreciation for the power and value of image, identity, brand, and other elements of emotional design.
    •    Findable. We must strive to design navigable web sites and locatable objects, so users can find what they need.
    •    Accessible. Just as our buildings have elevators and ramps, our web sites should be accessible to people with disabilities (more than 10% of the population). Today, it's good business and the ethical thing to do. Eventually, it will become the law.
    •    Credible. Thanks to the Web Credibility Project, we're beginning to understand the design elements that influence whether users trust and believe what we tell them.
    •    Valuable. Our sites must deliver value to our sponsors. For non-profits, the user experience must advance the mission. With for-profits, it must contribute to the bottom line and improve customer satisfaction.

You might also find his User Experience Treasure Map useful to guide you through the tools and artefacts of UX.

Another prominent fixture in the UX space is Jakob Neilsen and his writings and work around better practices for HTML may be useful if you are concerned with basic approaches for usability, accessibility and standard ways of presenting textual information.

It is important to understand how some of the more prolific and thoughtful leaders in the space are thinking but don't stop there.  Now more than ever there are tons of people posting around the web about and on user experience. The badge below keeps track of all tweets that are tagged #ux and for the most part the UX conversation on Twitter can be both enlightening and engaging.  It also provides a lot of jumping off points to other articles on the subject.


Thursday, May 06, 2010

A Fourth Value for an Identity Pattern in Three Parts

I was on a thread today regarding the use of screen name or username as a way of identifying a user. Clearly there are patterns, or maybe one pattern with variations, in web application design that revolve around user identity management.

This confusion is compounded by using online services, such as Google, Yahoo!, eBay and other services who have established their identity models based on engineering-centric requirements.

I came across a great post in the Habitat Chronicles that essentially documents the historical belief that lead to conjoining the requirements of engineering (establishing sessions, retrieving database records, etc.) with the users requirements of recognizability and self-expression. But, this approach can actually discourage participation due to the fear of exposing personal data.

Yahoo! where I used to work found that users consistently listed that the fear of spammers farming their e-mail address was the number one reason they gave for abandoning the creation of user created content. This feedback ultimately led to the very expensive and radical re-engineering of the Yahoo identity model.

The author, Randy Farmer, found that a tripartite identity model would describe the needs expressed by most online services and more importantly, would be forward compatible with current identity sharing methods and future proposals.

He diagrams this most efficiently as:



Randy Farmer's Tripartite Identity Pattern postulates that the three components of user identity are: the account identifier, the login identifier, and the public identifier.

Read more about each of the elements and some interesting feedback on the pattern here.

Another interesting pattern in this regard is the use of a claims-based identity model. This revolves around the idea of claims i.e. a piece of information about an individual that is in doubt and must therefore be proved. Using an identity model based around claims allows individual identities to hold many disparate roles which can relate to different organisations as part of a wider ID metasystem. The way in which these claims are asserted and proven can be handled by a variety of technical solutions and services.

Microsoft's (where I also used to work) ASP.NET team documented the Geneva Framework as used for building claims-based applications and services for ASP.NET applications. Features include:

  • Security Token Services (STS)
  • Federated authentication from ASP.NET applications
  • Object Model that facilitates claims-based authorization form ASP.NET applications

The above definition was taken from the below URL, this webpage also gives a more in-depth look at what is a claims based system is and how the Geneva framework fits in.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd278426.aspx

Microsoft's Passport service which I worked on for a few years at Microsoft is a good example how this can work to provide identity services between applications.

Who Cares? Where is this going?

Federated and open identity systems ultimately lend themselves to a new identity pattern that I have yet to see documented, but I actually think I see it in use quite frequently, mostly when I comment on blogs. Frequently the comment I post is able to retrieve information such as username or real name and an avatar without ever exposing personally identifiable information that could be used for rude behavior such as spamming or harassing someone. However, what strikes me as the untapped potential in this emerging pattern is the concept of 'ownership' of my contributions as it relates to the persistence and distribution of that identity.

Activity as a function of Identity

If there were a fourth element to the tripartate identity that was activity this would complete the social pattern. I could consume or represent that identity in the context of contribution, content or context as appropriate and as subscribed to by the user who owns the activity and identity.

This would enable a double-click on an identity that could perform interesting new social functions:

  • Aggregate user output in the context of an experience essentially allowing me to view contributions of an individual expressed as an identity
  • Assimilate interest and behavior and express this as a contextual metaphor (e.g. a score, a weighting, etc)
This is actually already taking place in emerging social networks and leading edge news/blog sites and in my opinion brings new value to the definition of identity.

...to be continued.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Handvetica - comp-y awesomeness

Found this great font for decks and docs around UX and UID work. I know it would be good for the right site or print piece as well, but this definitely keeps the handmade approach without having to resort to all the comic sans lookalikes which are hard to take seriously.

You can make a title png or grab the whole font here.

It was handmade in Switzerland by Studio Kmzero, who have authored a few more excellent contemporary and well designed fonts. You can see those here.