8. 1: How are we
going to get
out of here?
Not compatible with project
conventions
No criteria for breaking out
Not kompatible with
prevailing models
Quelle: de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_13407
9. 2: A strange picture of Iteration
Quellen: jordisan.net ; smart.com ; caranddriver.com ; iihs.org ; volkswagenaustralia.com.au
VS.
10. 3: It’s just plain wrong
• The Standard explicitly talks
about „Interdependence“ of
activities
• …and clarifies…
Quelle: ISO-9241-210:2100, S.11
11. • … that User Centered Design
Approach can be incorporated
in diverse Development Models
such as.
• Objekt-Oriented
• Waterfall
• Rapid Application
Development
Quelle: ISO-9241-210:2100, S.VI
13. User Centered Design helps
Projects AND Users
• User Centred = Evidence-based*
• = strong Arguments vis-a-vis powerful
stakeholders
• = fewer Diskussions in Projects (and more
productive ones)
• = fester more efficient Projects
• = Better Project Results, better UI
*) i.Ggs. zu Meinungs-basiert
14. If UCD is not understood
… It will not be practiced
?
Opinio-based instead of Evidence-based Design
Und damit leidet die Nachhaltigkeit von UX
15. Ignorance Centred Design
(ICD)
• No strong Argumente, why decide exactly
„this way“ and not differently
• long and infertile Discussions in Projects
• Weakly built Prioritization
• Bad Project Results
• Expensive Projects
That leads to …
16. ICD costs … Billions
Your’s truly alone has seen Projects fail that
amounted to a total Budget Sum of
approx. 1 Bln. Euro…
… among other reasons because Context of Use
and User Requirements were missing
17. Preliminary Conclusion
• UCD should be practised, because it yields better
digital products
• The circular UCD „Process“ depiction inhibits a
wider application of UCD.
It is misleading and wrong
18. Deborah Mayhew’s Usability
Engineering Lifecycle
• Business Parameters and
Requirements first
• Then iterative Design from
Structure to detaillied Design
• inkl really hot stuff: Pattern-
Libraries…
(aka “Design-Standards“)
Quelle: https://twobenches.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/47-01.jpg
19. One of my Approaches:
Rapid Prototyping /Rapid User Testing
• Service Approach if clients
cannot lock up an entire Team
into a meeting room for a week
without email
• Similar to Google Design
Sprint: No direkt upfront
Context Research
• User Test without Test-Report,
instead: Clients observe
Kick-Off & Requirements
1. Prototype & Feedback
2. Prototype & User Test
Finalising & Handover
Quelle & Copyright: Arno Bublitz
Rapid Prot /
Rapid UT
Plan the User
Centered Process ✅
Understand & Specify
Context of Use ✅
Specify User
Requirements ✅
Produce (iterative)
Design Solutions to
meet User
Requirements
✅
Evaluate Design
against
Requirements
✅
25. Die Requirements of ISO9241-210
can be fulfilled!
SDLC
SDLC with
UX-Aktivities
Scrum
Scrum
+ Sprint 0 / Design Spike
Plan the User Centered
Process ❌ ✅ ❌ ✅
Understand & Specify
Context of Use ❌ ✅ ❌ ✅
Specify User
Requirements ❌ ✅ ❌ ✅
Produce (iterative)
Design Solutions to meet
User Requirements
❌ ✅ ✅ / ❌ ✅
Evaluate Design against
Requirements
✅
im Live-Operations
✅ ✅ / ❌ ✅ / ❌
26. My closing Appeal
1. Delete the „Process“-Diagram from your Slide
Decks
2. Use the Standard as checklist and be flexible
about Development Lifecycles,
3. Ask the awkward and painful Questions:„Do we
really know our cusomters’ context? Do we really
know what the customers want to achieve??“