I was in search for some information, something specific to find a solution for some variances in the overall conceptual design. Trying not to "make it up", I came across a few articles, only to find out later they were out-dated. The Internet can be unfriendly like that. I came across this article talking about patterns in HCI design. While somewhat useful, the fact that it was linked to a known source for usability information and without a date on the link, it proved to be useless.
Useless because looking back at my study material , my guideline books I have from my HFI Usability Certification, it has already solved some of those issues. I say some only because of the latest innovation in using ribbon interfaces in Microsoft's Office 2007.
So the question came up again, was the certification worth it? Indeed it was because if it weren't for the fact that the most basic information is available to me at all times, I'd be going to many different links, websites and pages still wondering when can there ever be a central location for all of this information.
Which then also brings to the issue, what if I have a specific question that I want answered by different people?
In usability, there's very little support.
Because of that, perhaps then, there should be a forum? Something I think needs to happen because I have yet to come across one with complete professional interactivity.
So here we go, the dawn of something new: http://syncraniumue.proboards92.com/index.cgi?
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Certification - worth it?
Okay, so I've been urged to write about this since it took some time and effort to get me to this stage. Last month, June 13th to be more exact, I took the Human factors International Certified Usability Analyst exam. It was indeed a "doosy" since there was a lot of material to be covered in just 2.5 hours. 100 questions in total and it's an open-book exam and I had to choose the best answer - of course, there's only one answer each question.
I failed the first one 3 months before that, only because I barely studied. The minute I discovered I was only three questions off from passing, I vowed to shoot higher - 80%. So over the course of three months, nearly every day, I studied by creating an index I could use to search through during the exam. This was my way of studying - and it worked.
Now, I'm a certified anal-ist, that is, anal-ise about details meaning to be extremely thorough before a decision can be made as to what is best for certain interfaces. Of course, I don't anal-ise all the time as some designs are more apparent than others. But now I think differently.
I was doing laundry the other day and found out I almost put the dial to the wrong setting. The indicator wasn't marked completely to enable accurately setting the dial. Think of the catastrophic proportions that could have happened! Okay, so it's not life-threatening, but it could have been a pain.
So now, I'm constantly thinking about ways to improve user experience when things go awry. The second example, having to go get gas yesterday at a Mobil station instead of my usual Sunoco. First off, to cancel a transaction took over 1 minute - or it felt like that. Then I had to re-enter the information. After finishing pumping the gas, I selected to have the receipt print out - getting it out itself was a chore. I had to flip a cover up just to get at it, then it wouldn't come out entirely so it got ripped. Compare this with the experience of the Sunoco station - clear markings, no need to cancel a transaction and if you do, it doesn't take over one minute, receipt is taken out without obstacles - clearly it was a better machine.
Third example - yesterday I was also teaching my wife to drive a stick-shift. How does that happen with a beginner when she couldn't even "know" what gear she was is without having to stall it a couple of times before knowing she did all the correct things aside from shifting to the correct 1st gear? So really, it doesn't because there's no indicator, no affordance for the user to discern between the correct and the incorrect without having to put some strain on the drivetrain - it's a good thing the gearbox was built by the same company as Porsche's trannies or it might have been toast. So in the end, it discouraged her to continue - until the next time.
Fourth example - reading about someone having to modify their steering wheel to one that had aluminum sections on the top and bottom. So, what if the car has been in the sun and the wheel has been exposed for a certain time in the summer? Doesn't it burn the driver's hands? Of course, there's still other thicker leather parts. What if the driver forgets? According to the person doing this modification, he said Porsche didn't want to make the wheel too thick that the driver didn't get enough "steering response". So I asked, how about just putting less power steering into the system? A Lotus doesn't have power steering and is very responsive, and my car, a 2002 SVT Focus have less power steering than the later models - I've tried this and the later models felt like I was driving a boat! So in this case, reducing the system input could have improved the user experience.
So do I think being certified is worth it? Yes, up to a certain point. I just have to control my thoughts as now, I might be more critical than ever. The good thing is that it's about systems and not people.
I failed the first one 3 months before that, only because I barely studied. The minute I discovered I was only three questions off from passing, I vowed to shoot higher - 80%. So over the course of three months, nearly every day, I studied by creating an index I could use to search through during the exam. This was my way of studying - and it worked.
Now, I'm a certified anal-ist, that is, anal-ise about details meaning to be extremely thorough before a decision can be made as to what is best for certain interfaces. Of course, I don't anal-ise all the time as some designs are more apparent than others. But now I think differently.
I was doing laundry the other day and found out I almost put the dial to the wrong setting. The indicator wasn't marked completely to enable accurately setting the dial. Think of the catastrophic proportions that could have happened! Okay, so it's not life-threatening, but it could have been a pain.
So now, I'm constantly thinking about ways to improve user experience when things go awry. The second example, having to go get gas yesterday at a Mobil station instead of my usual Sunoco. First off, to cancel a transaction took over 1 minute - or it felt like that. Then I had to re-enter the information. After finishing pumping the gas, I selected to have the receipt print out - getting it out itself was a chore. I had to flip a cover up just to get at it, then it wouldn't come out entirely so it got ripped. Compare this with the experience of the Sunoco station - clear markings, no need to cancel a transaction and if you do, it doesn't take over one minute, receipt is taken out without obstacles - clearly it was a better machine.
Third example - yesterday I was also teaching my wife to drive a stick-shift. How does that happen with a beginner when she couldn't even "know" what gear she was is without having to stall it a couple of times before knowing she did all the correct things aside from shifting to the correct 1st gear? So really, it doesn't because there's no indicator, no affordance for the user to discern between the correct and the incorrect without having to put some strain on the drivetrain - it's a good thing the gearbox was built by the same company as Porsche's trannies or it might have been toast. So in the end, it discouraged her to continue - until the next time.
Fourth example - reading about someone having to modify their steering wheel to one that had aluminum sections on the top and bottom. So, what if the car has been in the sun and the wheel has been exposed for a certain time in the summer? Doesn't it burn the driver's hands? Of course, there's still other thicker leather parts. What if the driver forgets? According to the person doing this modification, he said Porsche didn't want to make the wheel too thick that the driver didn't get enough "steering response". So I asked, how about just putting less power steering into the system? A Lotus doesn't have power steering and is very responsive, and my car, a 2002 SVT Focus have less power steering than the later models - I've tried this and the later models felt like I was driving a boat! So in this case, reducing the system input could have improved the user experience.
So do I think being certified is worth it? Yes, up to a certain point. I just have to control my thoughts as now, I might be more critical than ever. The good thing is that it's about systems and not people.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Experts - the detriment of usability development?
I have one philosophy going - try not to be the expert of the program - instead, let the domain experts tell you what they know. This way, you can remove yourself from all the noisy data and the intricacies of certain ways of doing things. What I try to find most of all, is to ask the right question to compel a better response to find the answer.
Of course, easier said than done. To NOT become the expert requires almost complete removal of yourself and the ego some designers or usability practitioners might have. I heard of one definition of what certain politicians are suppose to do - represent their constituents - namely, our users.
So in that case, remain objective in no matter what you do. Most of all, embrace uncertainty because even though I might have to learn or become familiar about a certain program, all I really need to do is learn enough to understand the why's and the how's and the sequence that they come in so that even the sequence or its fundamentals can be shifted to improve productivity.
I'm finding that the experts that give me the data can sometimes be too much - so I read between some lines and find the fundamentals, something the novice user can understand. Because let's face it, the experts and the expert users aren't necessarily your everyday user - what about those coming aboard to learn the program? To dumb-down the level on conceptual understanding translated through a less complex and task-flow streamlined interface is the way to go, and I believe this eases the tension more for these expert users. They become experts for a reason - the interface is sometimes too difficult to understand, so they go about learning everything within the program so that they can explain it to someone who's a novice. Ever thought of that perspective?
If you keep it simple, in no matter what you do, you'll get the message across a lot better and people will use your programs more often with less hassles. And so, not as many "experts" develop.
Of course, easier said than done. To NOT become the expert requires almost complete removal of yourself and the ego some designers or usability practitioners might have. I heard of one definition of what certain politicians are suppose to do - represent their constituents - namely, our users.
So in that case, remain objective in no matter what you do. Most of all, embrace uncertainty because even though I might have to learn or become familiar about a certain program, all I really need to do is learn enough to understand the why's and the how's and the sequence that they come in so that even the sequence or its fundamentals can be shifted to improve productivity.
I'm finding that the experts that give me the data can sometimes be too much - so I read between some lines and find the fundamentals, something the novice user can understand. Because let's face it, the experts and the expert users aren't necessarily your everyday user - what about those coming aboard to learn the program? To dumb-down the level on conceptual understanding translated through a less complex and task-flow streamlined interface is the way to go, and I believe this eases the tension more for these expert users. They become experts for a reason - the interface is sometimes too difficult to understand, so they go about learning everything within the program so that they can explain it to someone who's a novice. Ever thought of that perspective?
If you keep it simple, in no matter what you do, you'll get the message across a lot better and people will use your programs more often with less hassles. And so, not as many "experts" develop.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
A process for digesting user feedback
One thing I've learned through the television program CSI, is that the evidence doesn't tell all. In the case of user experience design, neither does user feedback.
If I just blindly follow the user feedback, without combining principled thought into your designs, I would just end up with very little functionality or something unusable. The fact of the matter is, any time I come into such feedback, either positive or negative, there's always something to be learned here. Most of all, question the fundamentals - question the feedback.
I ask myself why someone says what they said. Is there a better way where I'd be able to change that perspective but tweaking my design? I usually answer - "Of course". And that's where better ideas come to solve the problem. I focus on the desired result, asking myself - "I want them to say -this- about the interface, now how could I go about getting that result?"
I look at many things in user feedback.
1. Patterns - namely, user habits.
2. "Negative" feedback - it's not always negative. There's actually more to learn from it.
3. Why it was interpreted the way it was - find the causes.
I then look at possible steps to correct or enhance the user experience in small bits at first, then use a bit of my subconscious (i.e. experience) to guide me. In these steps, I usually do several quick prototype iterations either in my head or on a whiteboard where I can explore solutions and its interactions to solve the inherent usability problems. Then I translate the best solutions into the actual mockup.
This is just one of the ways where digesting user feedback is taken in little steps - and systematically at that.
If I just blindly follow the user feedback, without combining principled thought into your designs, I would just end up with very little functionality or something unusable. The fact of the matter is, any time I come into such feedback, either positive or negative, there's always something to be learned here. Most of all, question the fundamentals - question the feedback.
I ask myself why someone says what they said. Is there a better way where I'd be able to change that perspective but tweaking my design? I usually answer - "Of course". And that's where better ideas come to solve the problem. I focus on the desired result, asking myself - "I want them to say -this- about the interface, now how could I go about getting that result?"
I look at many things in user feedback.
1. Patterns - namely, user habits.
2. "Negative" feedback - it's not always negative. There's actually more to learn from it.
3. Why it was interpreted the way it was - find the causes.
I then look at possible steps to correct or enhance the user experience in small bits at first, then use a bit of my subconscious (i.e. experience) to guide me. In these steps, I usually do several quick prototype iterations either in my head or on a whiteboard where I can explore solutions and its interactions to solve the inherent usability problems. Then I translate the best solutions into the actual mockup.
This is just one of the ways where digesting user feedback is taken in little steps - and systematically at that.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Five points to focus for UX
1 - Forgo the Ego
I don't let my ego enter into my work - at all. Would I say 100%? Most definitely. The user is always right. Or rather, the user is mostly right only because there are certain priorities that have to be taken into consideration. I don't take some user feedback too literally, meaning I won't take feedback and immediately implement them without further thought. There are also times when I must ignore the feedback only because it either doesn't make sense to fit it into the design. That doesn't happen too often.
What I always do is to let the user speak in spite of poor quality feedback. I let the user be heard regardless and by doing that, I serve them better. I also know that in order to be flexible, my ego has no place in my work. I let the user tell the story. I'm only a messenger.
2 - Prioritize the Plan
What I need in order to have User Experience successfully implemented is by prioritizing the plan. It's not just enough to go around wandering the software development roadmap without any dates or focus, hoping that Development will do its duty. It simply doesn't work that way. If any place is worthwhile going, it needs to be defined in a specific manner, with dates and with priorities.
3 - Know thy User
If you don't know what your user is doing, how will you be able to sell the software? It's as fundamental as that. Most of what software development and for that matter, User Experience is about is to fill the user void. Other times it's to actually create and fill the void at the same time - that's when users didn't even know that they need a better experience in productivity savings or improved efficiency. Better User Experience provides that.
4 - Test, test and test some more
Usability testing will reveal all that is wrong and right about the concept. Advanced Prototype testing will tell you where users will have the most trouble and areas where they are successful in performing certain tasks. Testing and the results that come with it is the cornerstone of change. Break it, fix it,then break it and fix it some more.
5 - Apply the Correct Principles
That means to further your own knowledge by taking a certification course in usability or just merely keeping in touch with current best practices and timeless principles. There are many resources out there. And just like any successful career or vocation, that extra "edge" will always propel you forward.
I don't let my ego enter into my work - at all. Would I say 100%? Most definitely. The user is always right. Or rather, the user is mostly right only because there are certain priorities that have to be taken into consideration. I don't take some user feedback too literally, meaning I won't take feedback and immediately implement them without further thought. There are also times when I must ignore the feedback only because it either doesn't make sense to fit it into the design. That doesn't happen too often.
What I always do is to let the user speak in spite of poor quality feedback. I let the user be heard regardless and by doing that, I serve them better. I also know that in order to be flexible, my ego has no place in my work. I let the user tell the story. I'm only a messenger.
2 - Prioritize the Plan
What I need in order to have User Experience successfully implemented is by prioritizing the plan. It's not just enough to go around wandering the software development roadmap without any dates or focus, hoping that Development will do its duty. It simply doesn't work that way. If any place is worthwhile going, it needs to be defined in a specific manner, with dates and with priorities.
3 - Know thy User
If you don't know what your user is doing, how will you be able to sell the software? It's as fundamental as that. Most of what software development and for that matter, User Experience is about is to fill the user void. Other times it's to actually create and fill the void at the same time - that's when users didn't even know that they need a better experience in productivity savings or improved efficiency. Better User Experience provides that.
4 - Test, test and test some more
Usability testing will reveal all that is wrong and right about the concept. Advanced Prototype testing will tell you where users will have the most trouble and areas where they are successful in performing certain tasks. Testing and the results that come with it is the cornerstone of change. Break it, fix it,then break it and fix it some more.
5 - Apply the Correct Principles
That means to further your own knowledge by taking a certification course in usability or just merely keeping in touch with current best practices and timeless principles. There are many resources out there. And just like any successful career or vocation, that extra "edge" will always propel you forward.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
It's more than just a checklist
I had it in my mind that usability was nothing more than just a checklist.
I was wrong.
It wasn't just about heuristics or just developing then following a bunch of guidelines blindly. It's more than that. So I ask myself, what is it about this practice that makes it more?
There needs to be understanding - a total and complete removal of ego so that I am able to learn what I need to, asking the questions of "Why?" the whole time. And with this, I create an environment that is more open. What I attract around me are people that will think the same way by looking at the challenge in front of us and coming to a resolve.
Right now, we're in the midst of starting the first ever Agile Development methodology. It has never been tried on this end, while other companies have been doing for so many years. To be able to survive and then to thrive in this kind of methodology requires open-minded people. It's not really about "having their say" as much as combining the efforts together, to mastermind ideas and form them into reality.
The challenge for me right now is whether or not reality can be created as fast as the mind can think.
I think I can.
I was wrong.
It wasn't just about heuristics or just developing then following a bunch of guidelines blindly. It's more than that. So I ask myself, what is it about this practice that makes it more?
There needs to be understanding - a total and complete removal of ego so that I am able to learn what I need to, asking the questions of "Why?" the whole time. And with this, I create an environment that is more open. What I attract around me are people that will think the same way by looking at the challenge in front of us and coming to a resolve.
Right now, we're in the midst of starting the first ever Agile Development methodology. It has never been tried on this end, while other companies have been doing for so many years. To be able to survive and then to thrive in this kind of methodology requires open-minded people. It's not really about "having their say" as much as combining the efforts together, to mastermind ideas and form them into reality.
The challenge for me right now is whether or not reality can be created as fast as the mind can think.
I think I can.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Adaptive User Interface
I've just downloaded and installed the trial version of MS Office 2007 with the "ribbon" interface. In just a few minutes of playing around with it, I've learned that this is probably the first interface I've come across that has an Adaptive User Interface (AUI).
By adaptive, I mean the interface (in both high and low levels) actually changes based on the context of the activity involved. The actual menu items are not user-controlled - instead they are based on user behavior and their tasks. For instance, additional first-level choices appear when the user is performing, say, a table creation or edit, or a picture or art object creation or edit. Specific functions also change based on the object that is selected for either formatting or editing, resizing etc..
The idea is to have the system use anticipatory design practices to better predict user behavior and flow with the daily interactions. Whether or not the system becomes smarter with use is up to the time factor.
Taken this further, I can definitely see an AUI that has algorithms that actually anticipate user actions before they happen. But how could this be without digging into the human brain? This is where science fiction becomes science fact - and it seems we're getting closer to this every day.
As for actual AUI's being in use, I will have to research this subject more to give me my perspective.
** Okay, so by Adaptive, you can say the interface is adaptive if there's personalization functions (displaying or hiding toolbars) as opposed to what I'm thinking in full anticipatory design model, with use of perceived artificial intelligence.
By adaptive, I mean the interface (in both high and low levels) actually changes based on the context of the activity involved. The actual menu items are not user-controlled - instead they are based on user behavior and their tasks. For instance, additional first-level choices appear when the user is performing, say, a table creation or edit, or a picture or art object creation or edit. Specific functions also change based on the object that is selected for either formatting or editing, resizing etc..
The idea is to have the system use anticipatory design practices to better predict user behavior and flow with the daily interactions. Whether or not the system becomes smarter with use is up to the time factor.
Taken this further, I can definitely see an AUI that has algorithms that actually anticipate user actions before they happen. But how could this be without digging into the human brain? This is where science fiction becomes science fact - and it seems we're getting closer to this every day.
As for actual AUI's being in use, I will have to research this subject more to give me my perspective.
** Okay, so by Adaptive, you can say the interface is adaptive if there's personalization functions (displaying or hiding toolbars) as opposed to what I'm thinking in full anticipatory design model, with use of perceived artificial intelligence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
