Out of curiosity (I'm very confused by this thread) is the issue with "user-centered" design the fear that it's somehow ignoring biz & tech?
I've always thought about it as "generative research that fuels design" (or whatever Dan Saffer said so eloquently) where as "expert design" to me means design based on my knowledge of the user/domain as an expert, no research? I tend to think of myself as "user-centered" in that I partner with clients, marketers, developers, engineers, etc. who tend to (over-) represent business and technology. But also because I use tools that I think of falling into that camp. Not that I don't care or know about business/tech, but it's not my "center." The semantics here are a bit overwhelming, but differentiating "styles of design" helps me with clients often. Some problems require me to deep dive on users, others I can design for without using UCD tools. To scope a project and manage client expectations, I find it useful to educate them about the two. Sometimes. ;) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrei Herasimchuk Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 4:17 PM To: IxDA List Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Defining UCD (and other things) On Jan 21, 2008, at 3:04 PM, Jim Leftwich wrote: > I advocate the non-loaded, mostly descriptive Expert Rapid Design > (ERD). As a first note, I'd like to say I completely concur with all of Jim's comments and viewpoints on this. I'm sure Jim is going to have to find a way to not have his jaw removed from the floor once he reads that. 8^) Second -- and this might give Jared an opening to faint as well -- I don't find the distinctions between "styles of design" as it pertains to the team to be of much use at all. UCD and ERD really are both sides of the same sword as near as I can tell precisely because of many of the things Jim noted earlier. Using them as labels or as a means to define the design process will cut you equally in the pain it can bring. To that degree, I think none of those terms are of much practical use, and it's largely why I make the claim UCD is a poor approach to design if not outright incorrect. What I do find useful, and the thing I think resonates with clients, executives, or the people who fund design, is the simple term "Research." That is to say, what is required is research, research and more research. More data and more research is never bad in my opinion. You simply can't have enough of it or enough time for time it. And by research, I mean across all facets. Design patterns, technology, feasibility, customers, market factors, trends, etc. The more I know, the more likely I am to make better design decisions in my experience. It simply cannot be silo'd to favor one aspect of what goes into a product. It's quite clear to me that research is needed no matter how a single designer or a team approach the actual design process. When quality research is present, the final quality of the work is significantly increased than when it's not. Given that baseline, I'm even willing to concede to let a single person or a collaborative team take a "user centered" design approach from that sort of in-depth, qualitative research vantage point, where they weigh their design decisions to favor users for whatever reason. I say this, because in my experience, once you have to weigh technology considerations and business decisions that come from concrete research and data, it's nearly impossible to favor any of them (user, technology or business) without driving yourself mad in the process. To that degree, Research is ultimate equalizer and the ultimate path to a solid foundation for any type of product design, and the very thing that often makes what comes out as a good product to being an extraordinary one. I also believe the approach Jim is referring to often occurs from people, either as a team or on their own, who have a lot of prior experience in designing something. This experience acts as research, to the degree that their ultimate design process doesn't favor or look like "UCD". It's just works from a basis of solid, concrete knowledge about the thing they are designing. -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
