Logic+Emotion

Boxes + Arrows

Russ Unger recently had a chat with me over at Boxes and Arrows. Russ asked me a bunch of questions, but I though this one specifically was relevant as it pertains to my upcoming talk at IDEA 2008.

RU:  What should the audience take away from your talk?

DA: I can’t answer this question really. People will take away what they want and that’s a good thing. I can tell you what I hope they will. I hope they will be excited about the future which I believe presents huge opportunities for people who understand how to create great experiences one interaction at a time. This could be through interface, through content or even through personal interactions such as responding to comments, etc. I can’t help but see a strong link developing between social networking and experience design. We are living in an age where we can design prototypes and get real time feedback. People can tell us what they want and we’ll have to be confident in ourselves to read between the lines. But at the end of the day, I believe that it’s more important than ever to deliver a great experience vs. building a myth around one.

You can read the full interview at Boxes And Arrows

Dan Saffer Launches Kicker

Just caught wind that Dan Saffer author of Designing for Interaction and former Experience Design Director at Adaptive Path is carving out his own path with a new shop called Kicker.  Here's how it's positioned:

" We do interaction-infused product design for:
consumer electronics / appliances
  kiosks and touchscreens / toys / robots
interactive environments / responsive objects
mobile and medical devices

We combine expertise in industrial, visual, and interaction design
to create innovative products that are as pleasing to use
as they are to look at and hold.

KICKER. [KIK-er] noun. 1. One who kicks. 2. An unexpected twist. 3. In poker, a high-value card used
as a tie-breaker. 4. In football, the player who drills it though the uprights when the game is on the line.
5. In extreme sports, a ramp used to launch off of. 6. In design, a brief phrase or sentence lead-in
to a story or chapter. 7. In product design, a consulting firm that smashes through convention."

Best of luck to Dan who is is a fantastic contributer to the field of interaction/experience design.  Dan will also be speaking at agency R/GA in NYC on September 17th.  I'd suggest you go if you can make it. 

IDEA 2008, + Discipline Convergance

I'll be joining some amazing speakers at IDEA 2008 held in Chicago on October 7-8.  The conference will include the following:

Jesse James Garrett - Adaptive Path
Jason Fried - 37 Signals
Aradhana Goel - IDEO
Dave Gray - Xplane
Bill DeRouchey - Ziba Design
Andrew Hinton - Vanguard
...and more

The role of all types of designers is being grappled with by many organizations.  I recently recieved a heads up from (former) Forrester Analyst Kerry Bodine who announced that she'll be leaving Forrester to build an experience design practice at advertising agency Hill | Holliday.  I am not suprised at all by moves like this as I've been talking about convergence for some time.  Marketing, design and "branding" are on a violent collision course as communications, experience and messaging become indistigusible to the average customer/user. It's going to get interesting to say the least. Hope to see you at IDEA.

Designing The Digital Experience: A Foreword

David Lee King asked me to write a foreword to his upcoming book titled "Designing The Digital Experience". I got to see an early draft of the book and it looks promising.  Most of the focus of David's book is on designing digital experiences, but in the foreword—I take a step back and examine the relationship between "experience" (physical or digital) and the social phenomenon.   Here's a sample of from what I wrote.  You'll have to wait for the book to read all of it.

"So if you went out and bought this book, you’re heading in the right direction. The reason why social networks are such a big deal these days is that they act as both the great equalizer and amplifier. Customers who have a crappy experience with a company’s products or services now have a virtual arsenal of communication methods to be heard.  Often times the search engine's powerful algorithms (Google) finds their content and links to their complaints.  When a certain “power consumer” couldn’t cancel his AOL account despite several pleas with the voice on the other end of the phone, he decided to take matters into his own hands and record the horrendous experience.  What resulted was a PR nightmare for AOL that started online, gained momentum and was quickly reported on several national news stations. What starts digital becomes something much bigger, and it all starts with an experience.

Yes, the social revolution needs to be understood, but what needs to be driven home even more so is that companies who continue to deliver mediocre or bad experiences will find themselves in a downward spiral, fueled by a digital revolution that has now empowered all of us.  On the other hand, companies who figure out new ways to delight customers will have brighter futures and consumers who are more than happy to do their marketing for them.  It sounds simple, and common sense because it is—but the reality is that few companies have customer service baked into their DNA, and culture.  The ones that don’t may choose to go about business as usual but will have to risk dealing with a better-educated and empowered consumer class who is being influenced by the most influential source out there.  People just like them."

High vs. Low Design

I recently did a phone interview for the User Interface Resource center which is sponsored by the folks at Adobe, Microsoft and Effective UI.  The folks at Effective UI were interested in having an informal discussion around the concepts of "high design vs. low design" that is, highly-designed "experiential" applications that push the limits of technology and human interaction (Think slick desktop applications)  vs. solutions that don't quite push as hard on (think Craigslist, Flickr, or Twitter).  Any insights I maye have provided may be rooted in common sense.  We use philips screwdrivers for cross head screws and regular screwdrivers for regular screws.  Skilled practitioners know they should carry both and really skilled practitioners build homes that people actually want to live in.

Below are a few highlights:
For the full transcript go here.

Tim Wood:
That’s a great segue into the context of today’s discussion. I want to get your take on two contemporary user experience trends that we see on the Web today — that in many ways seem contradictory or divergent. That is, simple design versus complex design. On one hand we have sites like Delicious, Google Apps and Craigslist, all of which have a very minimal hypertext-based UI presentation. On the other hand we are seeing a strong emergence of RIAs of various flavors — in Flex, Silverlight and AJAX — that support a very rich presentation of user interface elements, as well as very dynamic interaction. Do you see these two trends as being contradictory or do you see them as complementary?

David Armano:
That’s a really big question without a black-and-white answer. Way back in 2003, Kevin Mullet wrote a Macromedia white paper titled The Essence of Effective Rich Internet Applications which was a precursor to what we’re talking about today regarding high and low design. He made a great case for rich design. In hindsight, I would have thought that was where everything was going because it just made so much sense.

Mullet proposed that when you take something with function and value, which most applications have whether they’re Web-based or desktop-based, you should create a really engaging experience around it using the “breaking the page” metaphor. That makes total sense because when we interact with the Web, it’s not natural to wait for a page to load. Back then, it was safe to assume that everything was going to move in the rich direction. But then the curveball got thrown, as you mentioned, with the popularity of simple HTML sites like Delicious, Flicker, Twitter and Google Apps. Why are they gaining so much steam?

Tim Wood:
Are you saying that people are more willing to accept experiential failings as a trade-off for successful utility?

David Armano:
I think it’s a reality. Whether we’re developing using a high-end design or a low-end technique, we need to focus on what the project does and what kinds of needs it actually fulfills at the end of the day. We should think about usability as a continual process."

...In the white paper that I referenced earlier, Mullet talks about this idea of fitness to purpose. A basic example that he gives is: you shouldn’t use a mallet to try to drive a nail and you shouldn’t use a hammer to pound in something that could break. In our discussion today, the same holds true; you really have to think about when to go with a rich Internet application and when not to.

Are Methods The New Waterfall?

This is one of those posts. I really don't know if I'm "right", "wrong", or somewhere in the middle but I'm writing it on instinct. It was over four years ago when I received my coveted box of IDEO Method Cards.  I devoured them.  I instantly fell in love with them.  They're so smart—they're almost sexy.

And now I wonder if that's an issue.

Continue reading at Experience Matters

Design Isn't Dead. Design's Gatekeepers May Be Dying.

"In future there will be no more designers. The designers of the future will be the personal coach, the gym trainer, the diet consultant." ~Philipe Stark

Think about it.  We're living in an age where people now have direct access to brands.  Starbucks wants our ideas—Southwest Airlines talks to me on Twitter, the role of the modern day brand steward may be a little different today compared to 10 years ago.  The meaning of a brand hasn't changed. The way we interact with them has.

So I have to wonder how different this all is for the design community, if you can call it that.  Just as brands have their gatekeepers—the same people who told us that Diet Coke was meant to be enjoyed, not mixed with candy for the purpose of making fountains—the design world also has gatekeepers. Or you could call them guardians, hight priests, guru's, icons—take your pick.  Indeed Philipe is probably one of them.  Design's gatekeepers guarded the secret sauce to what they deemed was "good design".  They were quick to point out that not everybody recognized what it was.  Some, like Stark brought "design" to the masses, not unlike Prometheus bringing us fire in ancient times.  Some brands, like Target helped broaden the appeal of "designer things"—creating a mainstream demand for pretty and stylish things.

Now lots of people can design—and design means a lot of different things to different people (IE, I don't equate design with pretty).  But the tools are out there.  The techniques are easy to look up.  Some have gotten pretty good at design—creating the social platforms that many of us use daily to watch videos, stream content, distribute presentations, share contacts and build personal brands.  Scion's automobiles are made to be customized.  Actually, were they designed that way?  Or was it Scion owners who created a culture out of sheet metal and fiberglass?  Apple can't really control the design and development of both native and Web based iPhone applications—even though they give it a good shot.  And directors can't control how people choose to watch their movies no matter how much they may disagree with it.

No, design isn't dead, especially the really good design that adds value to our lives.  But the notion of design's gatekeepers may need some additional thought as more of us begin to act like "professionals" and take on the sacred role of design.  Where once we had Steve Jobs to tell us what design should be—we now have each other to look to as well.  It's not a substitute—it's an addendum.  For some of us, that's a welcome evolution.  For others—it's like having unwanted guests crash your party.  Which will it be for you?

Space. In Your Pocket.

I was sitting in the audience at the CanUX conference when I got the e-mail.  Someone from our Toronto office had sent out a note with a link to this prototype of an experimental iPhone Web application.  I was immediately delighted at both the idea and execution and couldn't  wait to get the thing running on my own iPhone.  My initial thought?  How cool.

But let me take a step back and offer up an insight as someone who loves their iPhone.  The iPhone was designed with "talkability" built right into it.  By this, I mean it's an extremely effective way to do "show and tell".  I'm always showing folks stuff on my iPhone—whether it be pulling up a video clip on You Tube and watching it with the boys—or showing photos to a friend.  Web applications on the iPhone have opened up a whole new world of both utility and delight.  I enjoy using the facebook version on my iPhone more than I do the full blown Web version. This is because it's simpler and more importantly—I'm in "recreational" mode when I'm mobile.  So I'm more prone to exploration using my iPhone and a connection to the Web.

That's why I think the "Pocket Planet Gazer" is so neat.  I pulled it up when sitting on the couch with my 7-year-old and instantly, learning about the planets became interactive, casual and fun.  And I felt like I was doing something which brought us closer.  This is what marketing should be.  Stuff that actually makes life just a little better.

You can check out the iPhone application for yourself here:
www.criticalmass.com/exploration

You can also see that actual application from CM's newly designed site at criticalmass.com. (currently in Beta).  Check it out and unleash 7-year-old in you.  :-)

Form + Function: Advertising Gets Serious About "Useful"

Brian Morrissey penned a solid article recently in the pages of Adweek which I believe signals the idea of "purpose-driven marketing" as being anything but a fad.  "My Vegas" which was done in partnership between R+R partners and CM was referenced, but aside from that, there were some really good nuggets that hopefully the mainstream advertising community will take to heart.  Here are a few choice bits:

"Funny microsites are giving way to useful, sometimes entertaining applications; the showing off of flashy technology is yielding to design geared towards generating sales; and crafting for social interaction is replacing one-way experiences. Now that digital points exist far outside the browser, designing for the Web is passe, with digital design chasing the elusive goal of designing experiences that wrap all of the above together."

"Five years ago, people would muck through a site with non-standard navigation that was confusing because the whole Internet was confusing," he said. "Now the Internet is so big you can't do anything that's annoying anymore."

" Application design is also driving efforts to tap into the social Web, with utilities holding the promise of being able to build communities around brands. Take "My Vegas" from Critical Mass, part of the "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" campaign. On the surface, the social networking tool seems like another attempt by a brand to draw people away from more natural social environments into artificial ones created by advertisers. But "My Vegas" actually provides a useful tool for visitors who want to get the most out of their trips, thanks to Critical Mass bringing the "stays in Vegas" promise to life with social functionality. "

" There's a big possibility to deliver on your brand through the tools or functionality you can give people that are positive,"

"The next step: free the application from the confines of the site. The old build-it-and-make-them-come design strategy is being replaced by a fish-where-the-fish-are mind-set that's leading advertisers to not view their brand sites as the be-all and end-all."

Good stuff. and Amen.  If there's one trend I believe in—it's giving people something that makes sense for they way they live—and makes life just a little better.

The 3 U's: A Model for "Advertising" in the App Economy

BusinessWeek's Bruce Nussbaum recently wrote a terrific post in which he dissects the effects of social media in the business world.  In part of his write up, he analyzes the My Vegas effort.  While of course I think that's great—what he says here really stuck with me:

"In a world of social networking and conversations among bloggers, consumers and everyone else, you don't advertise to them, you advertise with them. So companies have to design spaces--or politically ask to join existing networks--where people have a purpose to pursue (if only fun). Las Vegas is a prototype where people can network before, during and after an experience--going to Vegas baby!

Think of creating these kinds of event social networks around weddings, graduations, bat mitzvahs, grandpas 90th and mom and dad's 50 wedding anniversary--any ceremonial event. And put it on iPhones, please--mobility is pretty critical.

This little discussion moved from blogs and social networking to utility and usefulness. I'll say more on this soon because I think the entire advertising/marketing and /media/journalism industries are being reshaped by digital tools empowering individuals around the world."

And this of course inspired me to talk about what I like to call the "3 U's".  Here's how it breaks down:

Usefulness
Any experience is useful when it's meaningful and serves a purpose.  Currently much of marketing still breaks down into self-serving gimmicks and interruptions that offer little value.  Much of what's offered in digital is no exception.  While the majority of criticism is of traditional advertising, the fact of the matter is that interruptive based traditional digital advertising is not much better.  These are the digital gimmicks that work to get your attention but are usually done so poorly that they offer no value whatsoever.  Usefulness is the exact opposite.

Utility
Utility = interaction that delights us in some way.  But hold the iPhone.  The industry has hijacked the word delight and brainwashed us to think that only companies like Apple and Disney are capable of serving it up.  Let me tell you a story about the "no-frills" Craigslist, which just happened this morning.  My wife took pictures of a large playset we wanted to sell.  She uploaded them at 10:00 A.M.  By noon, she had several people interested and she sold the set in time for a late lunch.  We had the set dismantled, picked up and were $100.00 richer that evening.  That's delight in the application economy.

Unity
The promise of social features being designed into experiences is that it somehow brings us together in a fragmented world.  Even though we are all interacting through multiple social channels—we can now find people like ourselves who we trust and see what they like and dislike.  This influences our decisions from the stuff we buy to the things we recommend.  The best marketing in the world tries to simulate this, but usually ends up coming off as contrived.  We unite when we act in ways that were informed by groups of people who we trust.

So it's an easy way to look at a complex subject.  The subject of how technology continues to influence our behavior.  I don't know about you—but I use the Web very differently than I did 5 years ago.  See that little guy in the middle of the visual?  That's the evolving customer/consumer/user/participant.  Digital marketers who are using the same tactics that have worked in the past really need to think about that.

Interaction 08 Videos

So here's a video of my talk at Interaction 08

...And here's why you should watch it:

“There has been a change in what we’re being asked to produce for clients,” says MRM Worldwide CEO Alastair Duncan. “Agencies that have been traditional website builders are finding they can move into web applications.”

Advertising isn’t just about communications messages,” agrees John Owen, planning director at Dare. “It’s also about being useful. Nike+ is a perfect example of that.”
Top 100 Interactive Agencies

You're a smart group—so go ahead and connect the dots.  And be sure to watch the other Interaction 08 videos as they are excellent.

Interaction 08 In a Word: Better

Source Kevin Mullet, The Essence of Rich Interactive Experiences

As a self-proclaimed synthesizer, I'm always on the lookout for patterns.  There were lots of them at Interaction 08 which just wrapped up over the weekend.  The first pattern was the obvious—everyone there seemed to experience a type of "euphoria" which came from the realization of what they are.

'I'm an interaction designer—and this is what it means—and these people share my values".

The people at interaction 08 came from a number of different backgrounds.  Graphic design, Information Architecture, Industrial Design, Programming, Development,  Web Design, and others that I'm probably missing.  Everyone seemed to share the same struggle—what exactly do we call what we do and how do we evalngilize the value we provide?

And that's exactly what the conference and more importantly the IXDA community is all about.  But there was another pattern that I was interested in.  From Bill Buxton, to Gretchen Anderson, to Chris Conley, to Sarah Allen and even myself—there were clues that interaction design is more than just a practice, it's an integral part of a much bigger ecosystem in which the sum of the parts is ultimately more influential than the individual parts.

For me, the unofficial theme of the event was designing the holistic experience, which can include interaction, drama, storytelling, utility, community, purpose, and many other qualities that add meaning to our lives.  The above visual which I've borrowed from Kevin Mullet captures some of this holistic thinking nicely.  It's the combination of design, engineering and marketing which really matters.  It's the intersections if usefulness, usability and desirability that matter—not putting the emphasis of one over another.

Adam Greenfield calls this "Total Design"—but what we call it is less important that actually doing it.  In fact, while I was happy to see that people at the conference were identifying themselves as "interaction designers"—I didn't want to lose sight of the fact that while this is important—what's also important is thinking about how what we do fits into the bigger picture.

At the beginning of my talk—I said that I wasn't sure what to call myself.  But this doesn't mean I don't know who I am or what my role is in the world of creativity, design and interaction.  As interaction designers—or whatever we want to call ourselves, our goal should be to make things better.  We can make people feel less frustrated, more empowered and confident.  We can make people more productive, less stressed.  We can actually make lives better.

For me—interaction 08 in a word is better.

Better means more integration with technology—with marketing and even sales.  Better means thinking + doing.  Better means improving craft as well as ideation.  Better means reaching out to other disciplines and making connections that will lead to better experiences.

Like Mullet's diagram above—I came to similar conclusions as I pondered the role of experience design within the agency ecosystem.  I started with a sort of hub and spoke model—but then evolved to the "clover" metaphor.  For me, Experience Design was a part of the bigger living organism:



In the end, for me—Interaction 08 was a better way to move a discipline forward.  Like many of the attendees—I've found myself relating to this group more so than other organizations.  I guess that's a good start.  Or maybe it's just better.

Alan Cooper: "Best of Market Trumps First to Market"

Alan Cooper, widely respected in the field of Interaction Design and related practices kicked off Interaction 08 with a simple but profound message.

"Best of market trumps first to market"

Alan laid out his case thoughtfully and practically.  We are living in a post industrial wold.  Knowledge workers such as programmers live in conflict with the business hierarchies who manage them.  Programmers don't respect authority—they respect credibility.  And so from Alan's perspective—Interaction Designers who can "think in blueprints" possess that credibility.  So I'm going to make the leap that what's being said here is that Interaction Designers form a significant "link" that make "best of market" possible.

All sounds good.  I believe in the concept of "best to market"—you only have to look at the U.S. and our predisposition to invent—only to have other nations take what was invented and provide "best to market" products and experiences.  Henry Ford knows this concept well—Ford's invention of the mass production automobile was "first to market"—yet you only need look at the automotive market place to see how that story demonstrated that "best of market" wins in the long run.

Or does it?

My take on Cooper's talk—is that while I agree wholeheartedly with the "best of market" scenario, I see another story being told when it comes to social applications.  Can You Tube, Twitter, Facebook, Slideshare, etc. be put into the "first to market" category?  It's debatable.  But most of the social applications to seem to rely on community influenced iterative design that often came after a "first to market" reality.  Social applications may be destined to follow what Cooper is advocating for which is an emphasis on craft and rigor.  The theory is simple—better craft leads to better business models.

Now the one example outside of social applications that I can think of that defies this perspective is Tivo.  In my opinion Tivo was as superior DVR that combined both "first to market" and "best to market".  But even with these advantages, Tivo stumbled.

Big topic here—and I certainly don't have the answers.  But I believe that watching what happens to the Tivo's, You Tubes and Yahoo!'s of the world are will help provide clues as we continue to navigate through the space.

The Power + Limitation of Design

I recently did a Q+A for a publication that's going to be included at this year's IIT Institute of Design Conference (you should go).  The question got me thinking about Motorola and the RAZR.  It used to be my de-facto story to communicate the power of design.  But as I began answering the question—I quickly realized how the story highlights  both the power and limitations of design.  Anyway—thought you might enjoy a preview.  And definitely consider going to the conference which will include esteemed individuals such as Bill Buxton, A.G. Lafley, Claudia Kotchcka, Roger Martin, and Bruce Nussbaum to name a few.

Q: Give me your favorite example of a company or project that used design to figure out "where to play" or "how to win".

A: Interesting timing on this question.  I used to reference the Motorola RAZR as a textbook example of the power of design.  The story had all of the right ingredients: A brand that needed a breakthrough product, a prototype that pushed the idea forward, an end product that had reflective emotional appeal and influenced the design of other products.  But it’s worth taking a look at Motorola today which is currently having difficulties finding a buyer for their handset division.  Somehow along the way, they could not disseminate the success of the RAZR and the story ironically becomes a case study for the limitations of design.  I still believe design can be transformational, but it cannot be divorced from the corporate culture or values that a company believes in. 

My favorite current examples tend to highlight the ecosystem of experience a brand or company can provide.  I like to talk about examples such as Trader Joe's, SouthWest Airlines and even digital cousins such as Flickr and YouTube as examples of not only design—but the total experience.  What once started out as the poster child for design—the RAZR may actually become the poster child which demonstrates that form and function is simply not enough.  It was good design which ultimately became a low-priced commodity.  Sustainability is a hot topic in the design world right now and the RAZR illustrates that we need to think about sustainability beyond the “green” sense—Motorola was simply not able to sustain the momentum of the RAZR.  I recently read an article where the author said that the Apple Air is the “RAZR for notebooks”.  With hindsight being 20/20, this may not be the compliment it was intended to be.

Subject to Change: creating great products and services for an uncertain world

While I still have great appreciation and admiration for the field of graphic design—the simple fact is that I have a tough time relating to many aspects of it.  I haven't looked at an an issue of Communication Arts in years and AIGA becomes less relevant to me as digital media continues to evolve.

But, I will be adding this to my short list of books to read:



Co-written by several folks from design consultancy Adaptive Path, the chapters include:

CHAPTER 1
THE EXPERIENCE IS THE PRODUCT
“How do we deliver great products and services in an uncertain world? The thing to keep in mind, not just in the abstract, but truly and viscerally, are your customers and their abilities, needs, and desires.”

CHAPTER 2
EXPERIENCE AS STRATEGY
“All that matters to customers is their experience.” Therefore firms need a plan for the experiences they will offer, a plan so strong that it will guide decisions on how the experiences are marketed, maintained, and managed.

CHAPTER 3
NEW WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING PEOPLE
“We must understand people as they are rather than as market segments or demographics.” A new model for understanding your customers more completely and more realistically—the basis of an experience strategy.

CHAPTER 4
CAPTURING COMPLEXITY, BUILDING EMPATHY
“The success of experience-focused products is contingent on everyone sharing an understanding of users and a vision for the experience, because so many people play a role in delivering that experience.”

CHAPTER 5
STOP DESIGNING “PRODUCTS”
“The true success of experience design isn’t how well it works when everything is operating as planned, but how well it works when things start going wrong.” Products are simply interfaces to every service a firm provides.

CHAPTER 6
THE DESIGN COMPETENCY
“The act of design gives form to a powerful idea that many can rally around.” One design prototype can embody strategy, showcase an entire system, and immediately reveal the shortfalls of your business plan.

CHAPTER 7
THE AGILE APPROACH
“In an environment where exploration leading to a dead end is viewed as an expense to be reduced, true innovation is difficult.” New developments in the marketplace both allow and require new approaches.

CHAPTER 8
AN UNCERTAIN WORLD
“We should adapt to and embrace the uncertainty around us.” A new set of organizational competencies—-customer research, design, and agile technological implementation-—will shape the firms lead in these uncertain times.

Sounds like a good evening to me.

Digital Experience Design + A New Book From David Lee King

Meet David Lee King.  David's a librarian.  David's interested in transforming the library experience.  He's also interested in Experience Design—specifically, Digital Experience Design.  I skimmed through a draft of his upcoming book titled:

Designing the Digital Experience:
How to use Experience Design Tools & Techniques to Build Web Sites Customers Love

Here's how David Describes it:

"I have seen great information on parts and pieces of experience design - for example, Pine and Gilmore's book "Experience Economy" does a great job of exploring experience generally - but really doesn't touch on digital experiences. Other books are great at helping us improve the user experience on web apps... but miss the broader picture of experience. I'm hoping to show how these three areas - structure, community, and customers - are really part of the whole digital experience."

And a brief outline: (I especially like the community portion)

You'll learn the concepts behind designing for the digital experience and you'll explore current best practices in three areas:

Structure – Creating better experiences by improving a Web site's ease-of-use. Great customer experiences happen when customers can focus on their own goals, rather than on how to navigate your site.

Community – Memorable experiences are created via online participation and community. Learn how to start conversations with blogs and wikis, as well as how to use podcasting and videocasting to create a personal touch. Ideas to jump-start conversations are provided.

Customers – Finally, you will learn how to stage experiences online, with practical tips on turning negative experiences into memorable ones.

From what I could tell of the initial skim—the book holds some promise.  I personally like the fact that someone "outside" the direct field of "Digital Experience Design" is taking a crack at connecting the dots.  The book will be out in November and will feature at least one of my visuals.  I was also asked to write a few "blurbs" on Digital Experience Design which I did last night.  Enjoy the random thoughts:

"It’s been said that experience is the product, yet few books go deep into the subject of digital experience design.  That’s because since Gilmore and Pine’s seminal book titled “The Experience Economy” practitioners and academics alike have debated what the notion of experience actually is.  It’s time to move beyond debate toward action.

Experience Design in all its forms is a driving force of modern day economics.  Basically the average consumer, user or individual has become spoiled and as a result demands superior experiences and if they don’t get one—they go elsewhere.

Digital has changed everything.  While we still marvel at Apple for it’s lustful product design—we spend countless hours engaging in all types of digital activities from the Web to mobile and beyond.  As a result the lines between interface, design and engineering all blur into a single question: “did I have a good experience or not”?

It’s pointless to debate the differences between Experience Design and Digital Experience Design—what’s far more productive is to understand the difference experience makes in the everyday lives of human beings.

Digital Experience Design is not a fad, nor a buzz phrase, nor yesterday or tomorrow’s topic—it’s a reality that all businesses and brands have to contend with.  People will judge your products, services or brand itself by the experiences they have with it.  Just happens that much of this will occur across multiple digital touch points.

Every time we engage with a company service or brand in a digitally enabled way—we’ve experienced the art and science of Digital Experience Design.  There are literally thousands of practitioners working in this field whether they know it or not.  The hallmarks of any successful digital experience is simple.  Happy customers, people and users.

It’s time for us to get serious about Digital Experience Design.  Part marketing, part product and all experience—it’s what will provide a competitive advantage in a digital world inhabited by empowered individuals."

John Maeda goes To RISD

The big news in the Design world is that John Maeda, author of the "Laws of Simplicity" has left the MIT media lab to become president of RISD (video) (Rhode Island School of Design).  What a great move.  RISD, which is a excellent school will be lucky to have him.   In an Interview at BusinessWeek's NEXT blog, John says:

"I know that a great deal of my start up phase will be spent learning and listening about RISD’s unique strengths and using that base knowledge to figure where it could possibly go. Where can it go? Really the sky is the limit because it RISD is perfectly grounded in the perfect traditions of the past."

Right on.  John, if you're listening—I have a thought:

Would you ever consider opening up the RISD blog to the outside world?  How cool would it be to have academic discussions that transcend the halls of RISD and include perspectives from all over the place?  I dunno.  I could be wrong.  Maybe it's a dumb idea.  As a Pratt graduate, one of the things I loved about that school was that it's location in Brooklyn was the best of both worlds.  It felt like a private Oasis in the middle of an urban jungle—but on the other hand, you could get to NYC in minutes and expose yourself to a universe of experiences.  It provided an interesting mix of seclusion and exposure.

Design school was one of my favorite times in life.  But I often reflect back upon it, and realize how many new skills I needed to learn once I joined the business world.  I hope that 2008 promises more interaction between the worlds of academia, business and even design.  What a great year it will be!

Tip 'O the hat: Bruce Nussbaum

People-Driven Design

Google recently launched some social functionality over the weekend.  Chris Brogan has this to say about it:

"Google slipped a social network into Reader last night while I was sleeping. It’s simple, and unobtrusive, and gently prompts me to add more info, if I want. It’s about sharing your news- for now. But there it is. There’s Google’s simple, easy, I’m -destined-to-use-it social network right there.

Facebook, I hear bells tolling."

Has Google really launched a "people-driven" experience?  Most of us would agree that the best experiences are designed with people in mind. But the fact is that it's still really easy to forget about the end user or person that you are ultimately trying to serve. Here's a few ways we can go wrong even with the best of intentions.

1. Usability Driven
Many of the popular 2.0 Web services have usability issues.  Jacob Nielsen asserts that the space is in danger if becoming "glossy, but useless".   But there are a few facts we need to come to terms with here.  Applications such as Facebook, YouTube and others all have usability issues, but are highly desirable to the people who use them.  Putting usability first, in theory will create a superior experience—but in reality it's only one factor of the total experience.  You can have the most usable tool on the planet which seldom gets used if no-one wants to pick it up, play with it and talk about it to others.

2. Creative Driven
"Creative people" have a weakness. Sometimes we care to much about what our peers think and so if we see the industry awarding bright and shiny stuff that looks great but serves no real purpose, we'll be tempted to produce bright and shiny stuff that serves no real purpose--except maybe to win an award.

3. Technology-driven
Advances in technology let us do lots of things and the fact is that many experiences are designed putting technology first. Why didn't Vista work out as Microsoft would have liked? I've never installed my copy because I've heard from others that the upgrade experience didn't go smoothly for them.  This phenomena is called word of mouth.  If technology doesn't fulfill its promise of enriching our lives then that's not a people-driven experience.




People-Driven
People-driven design starts with real people in mind.  What they do, how they think, what their pain points are, why they like and dislike things and how they'll use what you create for them.  The main purpose of personas is to help large groups of people from diverse backgrounds such as IT or Marketing empathize with the people they are designing for.  Even if the folks at 37 Signals believe that "personas lead to a false sense of understanding at the deepest, most critical levels." they still design with people in mind—people who are a lot like they are.  People driven designs don't end at the drawing board—they factor in feedback through the lifecycle of the design process, which nowadays is infinite.

Most of the successful designs that we use and love are people-driven more than anything else.  Steve Jobs, wanted to create something of beauty and utility for a person—that person just happened to be himself.  So back to Google, if what they did over the weekend is "people driven"—then it has a chance.  Guess we'll find out.

NASA, We Have Liftoff

The New York Times did a write-up of the NASA.gov site which CM's Toronto office helped re-launch recently.  We've been calling it "NASA 5.0" internally as the launch coincides with NASA's 50th birthday—so as you can imagine, it's got some symbolic significance.  I've been checking out the site all morning and I'm really encouraged by a few things that I'm seeing  considering that this was a large scale effort of a government website.  Below are a few features that caught my eye:


Content Rich Homepage
Conventional wisdom on "corporate" Web sites used to be that you had to get all your content above the fold if you wanted people to see it.  Nasa.gov uses the "accordion"  interface convention to bring additional content above the fold, but celebrates that the site has valuable content to offer by putting a healthy dose of it on the homepage.


Social Bookmarking Options
I really liked how I was presented with multiple ways to bookmark the site to suite my preference.  A simple tactic, but nice to see on a site like this.


Tag Clouds  
Didn't expect to see a tag cloud on a NASA site, but given the content rich nature of the experience, it kind of makes sense.  Quickly calls out what others are looking at.


Visual Browsing
I really liked this touch.  In today's ADD-driven world, we need visual cues to help us prioritize things.  This is a nice simple way to prioritize content that Nasa feels is important (without being too heavy-handed).


Launch Calendar + Mission Milestones
Thought this was REALLY cool and effective.  My guess is that the insight that drove this tactic was that "space exploration junkies" like to follow NASA's progress on a daily if not hourly basis.  What a nice way to provide this info.


Image Gallery
Liked the horizontal use of the "accordion" convention here.  Flipping through images was enjoyable, and I could download high quality photos for wallpaper etc.



Blog + Feed Integration
Something every large scale site will have to come to terms with in one way or another.  How do you aggregate feeds and blog content?  Was nice to see that NASA promotes blogs and puts all related feeds in one place.

Cool stuff from our folks in the Toronto office.  My guess is that they've been working their asses off on this in a short amount of time—so kudos to you.  A nice experience that feels informative, useful and on brand.

Developing an Experience Strategy in 4 Parts

(click for larger image)
Download experience_strategy.pdf

I can remember a time not so long ago when the notion of "strategy" seemed nearly divorced from the design and/or creative process.  Strategists performed competitive analysis or "landscapes", talked to stakeholders—aggregated industry reports and trends and did stuff with lots of charts, metrics, bullet points  etc.  Then they moved on to the next strategic initiative on and performed an augmented version of the process while an "execution" team came in and did their thing.  I may be oversimplifying, but speaking from experience—I don't feel I'm too far off.

But many of us are integrating strategy with the creative process to result in tangible deliverables that are informed, and can help result in not only a recommended "roadmap" but lead to a vision for what direction an organization can move forward in.  Many of you no doubt are already working this way.  And if you're not, take this as food for thought for how you can better integrate planning and design as part of the broader "experience strategy" for your digital touch points of choice.  Some things to keep in mind:

Research:
Research doesn't have to be a dirty word, and while your clients may feel that they've done enough of it, sometimes what's actually been done is market research vs. more qualitative measures such as user research.  Any experience strategy needs to  begin with people—common sense stuff of course, but sometimes it's difficult to sell this notion to the business who's potential you are trying to maximize.  Contextual user research including ethnography techniques such as shadowing or field studies to help provide unfiltered insights that kick start the process.

Experience Planning:
Traditional planners lived in the world of brands and consumers. Experience Planners also factor in brand and consumer relationships but integrate elements that will be critical bridging the user experience with the total customer experience.  Research done in the previous overlapping state informs artifacts such as personas and mental models which helps to prioritize wants, needs and the desires of a user.  It also helps make the user into a person, and when done properly creates empathy among various stakeholders.

Experience Briefing:
What once may have been a creative brief, an experience briefing synthesizes insights that comes out of research  and communicates them in a way which can be easily digested among a variety of audiences.  The briefing can include artifacts such as videos, photos, or audio to help make a compelling case for why the project should move in a specific direction.

(Conceptual) Experience Design:
This is a fancy name for prototyping.  Basically, you ideate and start building stuff.  Point is that we need to start creating in the strategy phase because it will help make the project objectives tangible and concrete.  What's essential in this part of the process is that the ideation is informed by insights. This makes the process co-dependent on the initial research.  Anyone can start building a prototype, but good research, analysis and synthesis will likely result in a better prototype.  With a rough prototype in place, you now have a "thing" which can be validated or invalidated.  In this approach—while you're still thinking strategically, you now have something to "test".

Experience Roadmap
Here's where we bring it back to strategy basics.  Everything that's been learned about business, brand, and user needs.  All of the research and analysis combined with what's been learned through prototyping leads to a vision, a set of recommendations plotted over time.  A version of the prototype can be updated to help visualize what the this is and a plan is laid out for how to get there.

All of this can be done in probably less time than you think.  And the next step is for a more detailed design process to take place.  Probably an iterative process that aligns  with the roadmap.  But the most important thing to think about as a "Web Strategist" is, can you go beyond analysis in how you develop your strategies for a digital world?

Tip of the hat to fellow CMer David Stallsmith for contributing to some of these thoughts.  You'll find related reading and visual thinking in the Experience Map which also influenced this approach.

Composing for Experience

Bob Jacobson is back and just posted a—well, I'm not sure what to call it yet as I am still digesting.  But if you interested in Experience Design and why people crave positive, meaningful experiences—you should read it.  Bob describes his notion of "Composing for Experience" which takes me back to Dan Pink's description of Symphony.  Actually, composition and symphony do make interesting metaphors and may help explain the mystery behind the lack of a comprehensive and universal definition of Experience Design.  It may be in fact, a truly intuitive discipline—and intuition is difficult to put an elevator speech around.  Interesting stuff and certainly food for thought.  Go give it a read.

"Composition means gathering elements of meaning and emotion from the environment, the audience, and in one’s self, applying what one knows and feels about experience, and then expressing not so much a solution as a creation. the process of composing has rules by which it’s conducted, but the actual composition of a work – including an environment that provokes desired experiences – remains a personal feat and something of a mystery."

"The natural next step will be for designers of experience to integrate and apply the methods of scoring and wayshowing concurrently, Thus creating places, not only in the physical world but also in the virtual worlds of knowledge and understanding, that reveal themselves in the same way that a musical composition is heard. this is composing for experience."

~Bob Jacobson

Michael Dila on Overlaps, Chameleons + Design Thinking

Michael Dila is the founder of Torch as well as being a primary organizer of Overlap annual gatherings. We had the pleasure of spending some time with him this morning in our Toronto office and discuss a wide range of topics from design thinking to being a Karma Chameleon within your organization.  Yes, there was a Boy George slide.  Video is a bit choppy as our internet connection wasn't too hot—but it's worth watching.

When Presentation Eclipses Story

Is it possible for design to be too good?  At last weeks Design Research conference, Tania Aldous of Whirlpool gave a stunning presentation called " Winning the Hearts and Minds of Consumers".  I cannot overstate how visually magnificent her presentation was.  I felt like a novice as I sat there drooling over the amazing graphics and motion design.  The presentation was a non-stop visual dream come true.  The entire thing was professionally crafted—impeccable and brilliant.  The display of information was tasteful and well executed.  I'm not exaggerating—it was that good.

Only one problem.  I can't remember what the heck her presentation was about.

I don't mean this in a snarky way at all.  Tania was very articulate and gave good voiceover to her "slides".  I was so darn distracted and engrossed by the effectiveness of her visual presentation that it was hard for me to focus on what she was saying.  I am not alone—the designer next to me was also enthralled and I think somewhat distracted.  We kept chatting back and forth on how the presentation was done. What software did they use?  Was it professionally designed?  It had to be.  There was no other explanation. 

So it got me thinking.  Can a presentation be so well designed that it actually detracts from the story?  I'm really wrestling with this one.  I couldn't find one thing wrong with that presentation.  It was absolutely smart, attractive and effectively communicated information in an elegant fashion.  Maybe that was the problem.  The presentation layer was perfect.  Too perfect.  There were no signs of imperfection.  Nothing that said  "a human being touched this".

I'm going to have to think about this one some more.  It's really messing with my head.

What I Learned In Design School

Yesterday I was part of a communications exercise where we had to tell a story.  I told the story of how a single conversation with my Mom in the middle of the night made it possible me to attend design school (Pratt).  In short, I stated that had that conversation never happened—I wouldn't have been in that meeting room sharing my story to them.  Which made me think of this post as well as the power of a single conversation.  So here it as again—and thank you Mom for helping me pursue my dreams.

Originally posted on 9/25/2006

For every Ying, there needs to be a Yang.  A while back, Design Observer re-printed, “The Top 10 Things They Never Taught Me in Design School.” by New York-based architect Michael McDonough.  It’s a great read and all too true—sadly schools of any type don’t often prepare us for the real world.  But what about the things we DO learn in D-school (Design School)?  How are we influenced during this pivotal moment in our lives?  And does it carry over into life after D-school?  What about values that are instilled in our developing hearts and minds?

I was fortunate enough to attend Pratt for the better part of three and a half years. I received a very unique education which consisted of pioneering the usage of computers in design, cooking fillet mignon in the classroom, welding in workshops, and even posing in the buff for a figure drawing class (I'll explain in face your fears).  I learned a great deal about urban living in the middle of some pretty rough neighborhoods (got mugged at gunpoint in my second week).  But I also learned how privileged I was to be able to receive this kind of education in one of the greatest cities on the planet.

What I learned in D-school has served me well to this very day. Here are a few highlights.  All of the images included in this post were created during my time at Pratt.

What I Learned in D-school:

Work really hard.

Pratt’s Mantra was “Be true to your work, and your work will be true to you”.  This phrase has been branded deep inside my soul.  And we lived it daily at Pratt—the proof was in the amount of lights on during the night.  Everyone stayed up late working on projects because we believed in what we were doing.  Same goes for me today.  If I believe in the work, there is nothing I won’t do to see it through.

Compete.

When we pinned up our projects in front of each other in the classrooms—make no mistake, we were competing.  We were competing against each other because there was mutual respect for our fellow students.  We sharpened each other’s skills this way.  If we were going to put something up on that wall, in front of our professors and each other—it had better  be good.  If it wasn’t, or at least didn’t have the potential to be—we had let ourselves down.

Take criticism.

Having your work up on the wall, in front of your peers taught me how to take criticism.  Yes, my work was shredded to pieces by professors who studied under the likes of Milton Glaser.  Sometimes I took a beating.  But I always dusted off and picked myself up.  I learned early on how to take criticism and use it to make a better product.  D-school taught me how to listen and value the opinions of others and bec