Can't We Just All Get Along? Human-Centered Design Meets Agile
1. Canât we just all get along?
HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN MEETS AGILE
Maria Giudice, CEO and Founder, Hot Studio, Inc.
2. What does agile and waterfall mean and how does it relate to
human-centered design principles?
What are the pros and cons for each method?
Canât we just all get along?
Whatâs this all about?
3. Alon Salant and David Hendee, Carbon Five
Ajay Ramachandran, SourceN
Henry Poole, Civic Actions
Mike Migurski and Eric Rodenbeck, Stamen Design
Kelly Goto, Gotomedia
Josh Damon Williams and Tanya Herrgott, Hot Studio
Arena Reed from Pivotal Labs
Janice Fraser and David Verba, Emmett Labs
Chad Coerver, SFMOMA
Caroline Allison and Dan Engfer, Viscape.com
Kathy Simpson, Dave Shih and others, Hot Studio
Many slide lectures, podcasts, videos. blogs & several documents by JeďŹ Patton from Thoughtworks
Why is this issue so emotional?
4. Where I sit in the great debate
Agile Waterfall
Human-centered design
6. User Experience Visual Design Engineering
Project Management
Discovery Strategy Design Build Transfer
Waterfall approach
7. Predictable and structured approach
Human-centered: solutions are based on upfront research and strategy
Team roles are clearly deďŹned (designers design, engineers build)
Rigid, heavy, and slow
Documentation and speciďŹcations
What doesâWaterfallâmean?
8.
9. âWaterfall method is best when you canât aďŹord to learn from your
mistakes. You donât design software for the Space Shuttle in an
Agile manner.â Alon Salant, engineer
10. Types of projects:
Creating experiential, immersive, branded experiences that are not module-driven
High-risk or complex projects that require breadth and deep thinking
Findings through design research and insight are key to project success
Team dynamics:
Engineering platform and team is not deďŹned early on
Team is remote, making collaboration and quick decision-making diďŹcult
Client situations:
Clients that donât understand userâs needs, wants and desires and lack domain knowledge
Cannot be involved face-to-face, day-to-day or make decisions quickly
Many stakeholders that require documentation to provide context around decision-making
When Waterfall method works better
11.
12.
13. Team issues: Waterfall
âThe team didnât just learn about our work, they lived and breathed
it and became a part of our team. The design process helped us
focus our mission and the work they did truly reďŹects the diďŹerence
collaborative design can make in peopleâs lives.â
Kate Stohr, client
âTaking an intensely user-centered approach based on well-researched
user analysis, not conjecture or marketing hype, is as much a guarantee
for success as is possible in an arena where the consumer is king.â
Leigh Hood, client
14. âWaterfall methods can make it easier to carve out time to step
back and think big.â
Tanya Herrgott, user experience architect
Team issues: Waterfall
âTime to think is one thing, but freedom to change your mind is
another. Agile can take the pressure oďŹ designers from getting it
right the ďŹrst time.â
Alon Salant, engineer
17. Agile Manifesto, 2001 We are uncovering better ways of developing
software by doing it and helping others do it.
Through this work we have come to value:
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan
That is, while there is value in the items on the
right, we value the items on the left more.
18. Deliver useful, working software early and
continuously through iteration.
de
sign
build
test evalua
te
planiteration
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
2â3 week iterations or sprints Cycle X until product releases
User experience
Client
Visual design
user
story
iterations
user
story
iterations
user validation
Engineering
Project lead
19. Trust
Iterative and evolutionary design, continual learning and reďŹnement
Flexibility and ability to handle changing requirements
Client-driven or engineer-driven design, designer as consultant
Solutions largely based on intuition or hunches
Priorities are focused on addressing business needs and value
Lightweight
Fast but not necessarily cheaper
20. XPâExtreme Programming
FDDâFeature Driven Development
Crystal
Scrum
DSDMâDynamic System Development Method
Adaptive Software Development
Lean Software Development
Agile methods
21. âAll the engineers need is a picture and a conversation.â
Josh Damon Williams, user experience architect
23. Types of projects:
Applications with an existing conceptual framework already in place; adding features
Start-ups with a very clear vision of their product, its features and goals
Early working prototypes are that required for funding, speed to market is critical
Team dynamics:
Trust is paramount
Experienced, embedded team that can collaborate and actively participate
Designers (user experience and visual) who are comfortable with constant iteration
Engineers who are human-centric
Client situations:
Clients who can make quick decisions and are available every day (but can change their mind)
Business goals and vision are clear and will not change
Client understands users needs, subject matter, and domain knowledge
When Agile works better
24.
25. âAt ďŹrst, we were really scared. We were always concerned that we
would run out of time. Then it became really fun! Agile allowed us
to build in 50% more features. We were amazed by that.â
Dan Engfer, client
âI imagined this system fully formed when I started the project and
I was wrong. If I had them execute to that original vision I would
have gotten something I wasnât happy with.â
Janice Fraser, client
Team issues: Agile
26. âA lot of times I felt like the tail was wagging the dog in terms of
the details and the schedule creating and deďŹning the vision.â
Tanya Herrgott, user experience architect
âThe current project Iâm working on is like the war in Iraq. They
quickly attack, you declare victory, and then you have to spend
a lot of time to achieve something meaningful.â
Josh Damon Williams, user experience architect
Team issues: User Experience
27. Team issues: Visual Design and Engineering
âIâm always nervous about Agile. You have to think on your feet
and be ďŹexible all of the time.â
David Shih, visual designer
âWe give our customers the highest value for time spent in the
shortest time.â
Alon Salant, engineer
29. Disconnects and philosophical diďŹerences
âItâs intuitive from a design point of view to design upfront,
and itâs intuitive for the engineers to see it all upfront, but you
canât have your cake and eat it too.â
Arena Reed, user experience architect
30. Holistic vs. modular thinking
Research-based assumptions/decisions vs. hunches/intuition
Enumeration and alternatives vs. iterations
User research vs. user validation
Scheduled change vs. continual change
Artifacts vs. working software
Quality vs. quantity
Big disconnects
31. Similarities
âUltimately, the end goals are the same, to build products
that donât suck and to deliver value to the end user.â
David Verba, engineer
32. Similarities
Full team involvement and participation is important on day one
User feedback is valued at all points in the process
Collaboration and respecting individual contribution is key to good design
Prioritization methods help set expectations
Design for ďŹexibility; expect change and evolution
Communication is critical and needs to be transparent
34. Engineering
Discovery Strategy Design
Waterfall-Agile Combo
Build Transfer
de
sign
build
test
evalua
te
planiteration
Research assessment
(interviews, contextual
inquiry, usability tests)
Cycle 0
2 weeks
Goal modeling
User modeling
Scenario & task modeling
2â4 weeks
Concept modeling
High level
sitemaps or task flows
Key schematics
Feature prioritization
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
2â3 week iterations or sprints Cycle X until product releases
User experience
Client
Visual design
user
story
iterations
user
story
iterations
user validation
Engineering
Project lead
35.
36. Human-centered-Agile
de
sign
build
test evalua
te
planiteration
Research assessment
(interviews, contextual
inquiry, usability tests)
Cycle 0
2 weeks
Goal modeling
User modeling
Scenario & task modeling
2â4 weeks
Concept modeling
High level
sitemaps or task flows
Key schematics
Feature prioritization
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
2â3 week iterations or sprints Cycle X until product releases
User experience
Client
Visual design
user
story
iterations
user
story
iterations
user validation
Engineering
Project lead
37. Redefine the definition of âdesignerââ include everyone in
the design process, but still be clear on ownership of decisions,
including clients
Communicate and collaborate early and often
Be flexible, trust your team, and donât let your ego get the best of you
Lessons learned