Thank you all for reading my paper and for contributing to this lively discussion. I have received a lot of queries both by mail and on the discussion boards so apologies if it takes me a while to reply to direct questions regarding the research.
I suppose that I should set a few things straight from the outset. I conducted the research from a neutral stand point. As an interaction design consultant, I have some experience working with personas, and I have seen them succeed and fail in various projects. I was curious as to what impact the persona-based design approach actually has the design process and ultimately the design solution. My research was conducted as scientifically as possible (unfortunately some compromise was unavoidable) - and I took great care to give the same information to the 3 groups - albeit in different formats. Same brief, same requirements, same functionality. The difference was that the control group received raw research data (facts figures etc) while the other 2 teams received personas built from this data. I provided image boards to the control group to visualise the descriptions of the users home and environment given to the other 2 groups as part of the persona description. To be effective my research had to have a limited scope. I was not looking at how to conduct user research or create effective personas etc. At the end of the project I was able to measure the differences between the groups, based on the final design work, anonymous questionnaires and on group interviews with students and tutors. Based on my findings I can say that personas did make a difference, both in the usability of the final designs and the team dynamics of the designers involved. Many of the differences were in areas that cannot be easily measured such as 'motivation' 'empathy' and 'enthusiasm'. Other factors such as usability were easier to assess empirically. The findings show that using personas as a design tool was more effective in creating 'user-centred' solutions than not using them. It does not claim that they are a silver bullet solution, in fact the feedback form both tutors and students point to some of the pitfalls inherent in the technique. In particular I believe that the quality of research behind personas is critical to their success (although 'creating' personas was outside the scope of this research paper). Much has been made about the fictional element of personas and how this deviation from 'actual fact' is the weak link with the technique, making personas scientifically unreliable. Personas are a design tool - not a scientific instrument. Design is a creative method for solving problems. Personas are a technique that makes it easier to visualise the end user and empathise with their goals and tasks My research shows that there is some evidence to show that personas are effective in this regard. I don't claim that it answers the debate once and for all, but it does show that there is some evidence in their favour. Finally, I would not describe myself as a 'persona advocate' - I dont believe that they work in every situation or with every design team. As I said at the outset, I have seen them work and fail. I think the fundamental problem is that they are a complex tool that seems rather simple to use, but in fact requires great skill and aptitude. By conducting humble research such as my own, we can achieve a better understanding of how they work and ultimately how best to use them. frank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=42315 ________________________________________________________________ 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
