Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ED Score - Emotional Design Score

9,760 views

Published on

ED (Emotional Design) Score is a method to help communicating feedback and discussing improvement better with clear actionable items. It's not just about UX & Design, but also about business, technology, and brand.

Published in: Design

ED Score - Emotional Design Score

  1. 1. ED SCORE Borrys Hasian Emotional Design Score Head of UX & Design, Rakuten Viki @borryshasian This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  2. 2. PROBLEMS No clear approach in communicating why a product is bad and frustrating. No structured method to compare our own product with competitors’ product. Unclear actionable items to improve the experience.
  3. 3. In what ways might we design a method that helps people communicate feedback better with clear actionable items? In what ways might we design a method that helps people discuss experience improvement ideas better with clear actionable items? CHALLENGES
  4. 4. ED Score Communicate feedback and discuss improvement better with clear actionable items. Version Notes Date Author 0.1 Initial Draft Jan 6, 2016 Borrys Hasian
  5. 5. INSPIRATIONS Don Norman’s three levels of processing: Visceral, Behavioral, and Reflective. Dieter Rams’s Ten Principles of Good Design. Tom Kelley’s Creative Confidence Jon Maeda’s Laws of Simplicity Alan Cooper’s Goal- Directed Design
  6. 6. Reflective Behavioral Visceral Self-image, personal satisfaction, memories Appearance, touch, and feel Function, performance, usability, and simplicity. THREE LEVELS OF PROCESSING IN THE BRAIN
  7. 7. 10 Principles of Good Design Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective Behavioral Visceral
  8. 8. 10 Principles of Good Design Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective Behavioral Visceral
  9. 9. 10 Principles of Good Design Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective Behavioral Visceral
  10. 10. 10 Principles of Good Design Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.Reflective Behavioral Visceral
  11. 11. ED (Emotional Design) Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.
  12. 12. ED (Emotional Design) Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.
  13. 13. ED (Emotional Design) Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.
  14. 14. ED (Emotional Design) Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. Good design is aesthetic. Good design is unobtrusive. Good design is long-lasting. Good design makes a product understandable. Good design makes a product useful. Good design is innovative. Good design is thorough down to the last detail. Good design is as little design as possible. Good design is honest. Good design is environmentally friendly.
  15. 15. eral ioral ctive ED Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. 1. I think the product looks good. 2. I found that the product was easy to learn. 3. I could achieve my goals easily. 4. I found the features of the product satisfy my needs. 5. I found that the product is troublesome to use. 6. I felt that the performance of the product is good. 7. I felt that the product is complicated. 8. I felt good when using the product. 9. I think I would use the product again in the future. 10. I would recommend the product to my friends/family.
  16. 16. eral ioral ctive ED Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. 1. I think the product looks good. 2. I found that the product was easy to learn. 3. I could achieve my goals easily. 4. I found the features of the product satisfy my needs. 5. I found that the product is troublesome to use. 6. I felt that the performance of the product is good. 7. I felt that the product is complicated. 8. I felt good when using the product. 9. I think I would use the product again in the future. 10. I would recommend the product to my friends/family.
  17. 17. eral ioral ctive ED Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. 1. I think the product looks good. 2. I found that the product was easy to learn. 3. I could achieve my goals easily. 4. I found the features of the product satisfy my needs. 5. I found that the product is troublesome to use. 6. I felt that the performance of the product is good. 7. I felt that the product is complicated. 8. I felt good when using the product. 9. I think I would use the product again in the future. 10. I would recommend the product to my friends/family.
  18. 18. eral ioral ctive ED Scale Users' subjective reactions to the product's look, sound, smell/taste (if any). The ability of users to achieve the goals. Level of resource/effort consumed when doing tasks to achieve goals. Less but better. Focusing on the essential aspects that matter to the users. Users' subjective satisfaction or memory with the product. 1. I think the product looks good. 2. I found that the product was easy to learn. 3. I could achieve my goals easily. 4. I found the features of the product satisfy my needs. 5. I found that the product is troublesome to use. 6. I felt that the performance of the product is good. 7. I felt that the product is complicated. 8. I felt good when using the product. 9. I think I would use the product again in the future. 10. I would recommend the product to my friends/family.
  19. 19. ED SCALE Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 1. I think the product looks good. 2. I found that the product was easy to learn. 3. I could achieve my goals easily. 4. I found the features of the product satisfy my needs. 5. I found that the product is troublesome to use. 6. I felt that the performance of the product is good. 7. I felt that the product is complicated. 8. I felt good when using the product. 9. I think I would use the product again in the future. 10. I would recommend the product to my friends/family.
  20. 20. For 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,10 Temp Score = Scale -1 ED Score Calculation For 5, 7 Temp Score = 5 - Scale ED Score = Sum of Temp Score x 2.5
  21. 21. Example of use
  22. 22. Scenario You have an existing mobile app and want to improve the overall app experience.
  23. 23. 3 Steps to Start 1. Get at least 2 people (including you) to score your app/web/product/service/feature/etc. You can also score competitor’s product as a reference. 2. Ask ‘WHY’ for any score gap, and refer to the 10 Principles of Good Design. 3. Set the next actionable items to close the gap.
  24. 24. Step 1: ED Scoring of a mobile app by Designer vs Product Manager Designer’s scoring Product Manager’s scoring
  25. 25. The score is not the main focus. It’s the WHY to the gap. “Why did you put 2 on ‘... product looks good’?” “Why did you put 3 on ‘... troublesome to use’?” Step 2: Asking WHY
  26. 26. Refer to the 10 Principles of Good Design to set the next actionable items based on the experience gap. Step 3: Actionable Items
  27. 27. UX Design has a lot of different methods/metrics to measure its success, so you need to find what works/doesn’t work for the team. Try ED Scoring method to see if it works for you. Come up with your own method based on the ED Score, and share with us. WHAT’S NEXT?
  28. 28. ● A checklist for actionable items (that maps to Ram’s principles). ● Each of the criterias from ED Scale could have different weight (e.g Performance is 15% and Look is 5%, where the rest are 10%). ● Etc. FUTURE PLAN. To be added to the slides later.
  29. 29. Empathy. Experiment. Build ideas on top of others’. Tom Kelley’s Creative Confidence
  30. 30. Thank You. ありがとうございました. Gracias. 谢谢. Merci. Terima kasih. Obrigado Borrys Hasian @borryshasian Special thanks to Teo Choong Ching (@choongchingteo) and Esther (@estherfanll) from Rakuten Viki Design (RVD Twitter / RVD Facebook Page) for giving feedback on version 0.1 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

×