>>Thanks Angel and suggest part of the answer lies in:No worries. >>* Asking the right questions up front to determine value and driving requirements based on research, need, gut feel, market gaps, fill in your own ...
Agreed. I would add having the right people in the correct roles. It sounds so simple. >>* Having faith that the folks determining a market need have done their homework i.e. what are they basing their decisions on? Sometimes I wonder. I always wonder. Positive: Competitor analysis, Community feedback, metrics. Negative: Research budget allocation is based on meeting the revenue goals which in turn dictates the user base. Funneling that research based on that target audience to achieve those goals doesn't necessarily infer the user's best interest are met; but, rather their behaviors and habits are used as models to create user experiences. >>* Ensuring that people who are potential users of the products & services being developed are invited to preview what the business is thinking about (and this goes beyond 1-2 Focus Groups) Positive The more involvement by the potential users the better after all they are the target audience. Negative What about the budget? I've been pondering on this one. Everyone wants there piece of the pie and are willing to say it's for whatever that research deems the worthy need. The user. Slow dripping the budget and information bottleneck to achieve a guaranteed piece of the pie is common. My latest pitch after hearing a potential clients woes was that I wanted to figure out their needs and make the touchdown in the least amount plays. This is only one side of the design, what about those users they have to be factored in too right? >>* Mapping Product & Service decisions to a larger Product Strategy All interdependent and should be handled with that in mind. On a smaller scale having a design team deploy one logo across all medians (collateral, consumer packaging, mobile, broadcast, apparel, billboard, etc..) effectively is simple; but, getting a team to all agree on something so simple is a difficult task. If you multiply that by a million while effectively managing the strategy you are on the right team. Likeliness? Someone has to draw lines, someone has to not get their way. >>Have seen times where we are invited to Design, Review or Test something that does not appear to add value or fill any type of market need. When some basic questions up front would have changed the Product Strategy completely. You and me both. It is the nature of the beast. Good example for me is a couple phone interviews I had just recently and I said to the interviewees 'I don't think this is a good fit'. I couldn't imagine having that conversation everyday for however long. On the other hand I don't think every decision is an opportunity to explore the entire spectrum of possibilities. I just had a convo where I was all if I went to starbucks in the morning on the way to work to get my coffee and the cashier offered me every possible blend, brew and way to distill the water while the line grew longer and my attention grew shorter it wouldn't be right. We as professionals are faced with those decision intersections daily while faced with similar constraints, people waiting, need to be somewhere else, time money etc... Identifying and administering when and how these moments go down is essential. I had some reject that loved to debate want to tell my favorite radiohead album wasn't my favorite. I really just wanted him to go away before tainting anything else I held dear. >> But ... when trying to apply those type of questions, it can often be pushed aside in favor of delivering (as that's seen as the reward) or playing with a new technology or platform. Not necessarily the value of what you are building but implementing it on time and budget. If you have the luxury of playing with a new technology; but, are crippled by the deadline (the deadline is what measures the budget, right?) I would find the common tech ground and run the dev parallel. Often you have to abandon ship because the plan changes and the new technology hasn't been defined or the platform etc. Politics push things. Hopefully you can successfully leverage the naysayers aside and do what is right for the project and goals. I could tell you stories my friend. >>This is also another interesting recent perspective on what we make and sell - Neat visuals. I think part of being a designer is being effective with that dixie cup consumer need and crafting your process to fit with that paired with your work environment. If you have good intentions and someone sinks your idea with malicious intent you're still the winner. External pressures drive people to weirdness. Take care DS. On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Daniel Szuc <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Angel and suggest part of the answer lies in: > > * Asking the right questions up front to determine value and driving > requirements based on research, need, gut feel, market gaps, fill in > your own ... > * Having faith that the folks determining a market need have done > their homework i.e. what are they basing their decisions on? > Sometimes I wonder. > * Ensuring that people who are potential users of the products & > services being developed are invited to preview what the business is > thinking about (and this goes beyond 1-2 Focus Groups) > * Mapping Product & Service decisions to a larger Product Strategy > > Have seen times where we are invited to Design, Review or Test > something that does not appear to add value or fill any type of > market need. When some basic questions up front would have changed > the Product Strategy completely. But ... when trying to apply those > type of questions, it can often be pushed aside in favor of > delivering (as that's seen as the reward) or playing with a new > technology or platform. Not necessarily the value of what you are > building but implementing it on time and budget. > > This is also another interesting recent perspective on what we make > and sell - > > http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2009/04/why-marketing-in-a-post-consumer-era-wont-look-like-marketing.html > > rgds, > Dan > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Posted from the new ixda.org > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=41112 > > > ________________________________________________________________ > 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 > ________________________________________________________________ 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
