"I always took UCD to mean that user's needs (and not users
themselves) were placed well in the centre (but not exclusively) of
the design process."

Yeah I guess we disagree here. When I normally get involved in UCD it
has a specific process in mind resembling that which I outlined.
Perhaps the issue is that the origninal intent have mutated.

"Having worked in a hospital, I can tell of some disasterous pieces
of equipment that had a negative impact on people's lives due to
poor design."

Sure as I said, if you are doing something truly new that don't have
a well established set of design patterns you will involve the users
to a great extent.

But these kinds of projects are the exception not the rule. For most
cases where UCD is hailed as the way forward we are talking about
standard design problems (need to create a timesheet application,
video player, financial application, community etc.

"I know it isn't very artistic, but it is design nonetheless. From
my training as a psych, there are ways to tease this information out
but it takes a lot of work with training and experience to do it
well."

I don't believe in "artistic" I believe in problem solving. Design
is the ability to make informed decisions solving various problems.
It's not game of aesthetics although they do have a positive impact
on clarity when applied properly.

"But it does feel like user centred design to me simply because the
user's needs are core to the design itself. I really wasn't aware
that UCD demanded only qualitative data."

It doesn't but it puts a certain weight to it that is unwarrented
the way it's used in most cases.

Of course the user is always in center that is exactly what I and
others are saying. 

It's just not in the center as it's used most often in UCD which to
me is a specific approach towards designing solutions.

At the end of the day the real test is the final product, someone has
to sit there and move the pixels around so they make sense. Involving
the user as most agencies do when they claim UCD is simply not
enough.

It is of course enough for the clients because they can then always
defend poor results with user testing.

It's become a placebo that don't really solve the problem IMHO.

The real trick is to understand what users do, not what they say they
do or want to do.

With regards to quantitative data I would bet you that if we did a
sample of 20 agencies that claimed they used UCD, perhaps only one
actually used quantitative data.




. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45486


________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to