It’s natural to think in terms of
what you should be able to do.
We study our competitor’s
sites ... and think:
we gotta do one up on them.
Features determine:
• How complex a project/product is
• What technologies we use
• How much it would cost to build
• Who would work on it
• How long it would take to build
The real question is: how do we
determine this all fits?
What makes sense for our users,
and what doesn’t?
Many ways to slice the pie:
• who’s our target audience?
• what goals would they have?
• what do we want them to do?
• what determines when we’ve met
their needs?
The meta-hard questions:
• when do we need to revisit our
concept?
• what do we need to evaluate?
• how do we know when to stop?
Features don’t tell us how to
answer these questions.
Some design polarities
?
your users’
goals goals
?
design for design to
efficiency delight
Some design polarities
?
browse search
?
active passive
(comment, vote) (read)
Quality challenges:
• carrying a vision throughout the life
of the project
• everyone on the team has to “get it”
Treat your design like an
ongoing experiment.
Create clear, testable
hypotheses for design goals ...
This was a learning lunch I gave at BAM Strategy, a more
This was a learning lunch I gave at BAM Strategy, as an intro to a UX work session on helping the team evaluate what they are doing right/wrong on a particular product. less
0 comments
Post a comment