With transcendence I mean that there is some sort of quality transfer from one phase of the process to the next.
I.e. the quality of the user research gets transferred into the UCD, that then get's transferred into the visual design and development and then at last into the user experience of the product/service. This does not happen because UCD focuses on the users needs, suggestions and validation of the current state of affaird rather than on the users problems and actual usage of the product. It becomes a pseudo solution to a pseudo problem, with pseudo suggestions that are not as such transferable into the actual design and development. I.e there is no guarantee that the end product is going to be any good just because you have done a fantastic comprehensive UCD process. Now that is not the fault of the people doing the UCD, that is the fault of the UCD approach in itself. My suggestion is that you do UCD when it's needed which in my mind is when you are dealing with something there is no accumulated knowledge about. Otherwise it's your damn job to know enough about most areas to design a decent and usable solution yourself. UCD have become a mantra and the fact that there are companies who only do that is to me a clear evidence that something have gone terrible wrong. It should have been a tool, now it has become a religion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=46034 ________________________________________________________________ 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
