I have been interested in agile process for a while, especial it’s use with UX techniques.

The other day I ran into a myth that there aren’t many User Experience Design people with skills that can work on agile teams.

It seems UX people aren’t very flexible.

This I find almost laughable, in fact most UX professionals I have found are extremely flexible, often changing tack or techniques as required, at a moments notice.  Maybe we are too flexible.

The core of any agile process really is to have a role less team that can specialists with generalised skills.

Having the traditional defined roles of a Architect, Business Analysis, Project Manager and Developer is really against the principles of working as a collaborative team to achieve days tasks.

In fact what you want to have is the entire team being “T” shaped in a way.    With just deep specialisation in key areas, but still able to operate on other duties as required to get the team over the line.  Hence like the rise of the UX Developer.

Looking at this mix, maybe a User Experience Design “T” shaped person is also required.

Well it seems that “user experience” or even “design” is still a dirty word in the agile sphere.

Sadly I see this time and time again.  The UX specialist is brought in on a agile project at the end or just to correct some issues.   The consistency of maintaining the user experience is often lost as they leave.

The reason given is often that they can’t find UX people to met the team requirements when they are building the team.  Or that the user experience or requirements aren’t on the clients mind.

There is also a false belief that there aren’t any designers that can code (at least on the front end) and understand User Experience and maybe get Usability too.

Looking in the Wrong Place.

I’m calling people out on this one!  I know a lot of my freelance contacts (including me) who are UX or design based could fill any of these “missing skills” for an agile team.

The people exist, we the “T” shaped UX people are sitting around waiting.

It’s just your recruiters or  team builders that aren’t looking in the right places or asking the right questions.

Mainly this comes from the way people are recruited – along old school waterfall process – go get a BA, a Project Manager, a few Developers and maybe a tester or two.   Unless the BA and Testers are closet UX people, and it does happen, the project is going to face issues.

Which is a pity as these project could escape the usual last few sprints with the UX polishing consultant, and do it all properly from the start and save resources.

I guess that solution is for all UX people to just say they are a BA instead.

Will be very interesting to see the audience attending the upcoming Agile UX  Conference in Sydney.

There seems to be this idea of late promoting that all you need to design a user experience is a single developmental / design platform.  As if this platform is all that is required, the UX nirvana, the ulitmate UX tool.

This is a little like saying that your experience with a cup of coffee is directly reliant on the brand coffee making equipment and tools that where used to brew the cup.   With no consideration to given to the farmer, buyer, roaster, and the barista and the like.

UX is not about the spanners and hammers, its about the way you use and don’t use them.The discipline of user experience design isn’t really  dependant on anyone platform or tool set.

As we know user experience design is about the application of techniques, methods and abstract tools.

It’s not about Adobe, Microsoft, Omnigroup or any other software vendor.

UX Design the Good Bits

In fact if you are  good UX designer you really won’t care what the tool or design platform is that you’re using.

All you will care about is the outcome, the ability to see the patterns allowing you to solve the design issues at hand.

I often find myself shifting between varous tools from pen, paper, and a bunch of post-its (I know I love the old school) to Omnigraffle, Word, Balsamic, Sketchflow or the like.  Not really caring for the tool or the “process” but just the outcome.

These are just tools.Yes you have favourites, but in reality they don’t matter, all they are doing it making the presentation easier or saving time.  They are not the UX process.  They’re not the platform.   They aren’t the centralised  methodology.

In fact the UX platform is what we are carrying around all the time.   No it’s not an iPad.   The platform is what’s between your ears.

So if you think the UX  platform is a vendors developmental tools  - you really are doing user experience wrong.  Or maybe you have been drinking a little too much of the vendors UX koolaid.

To often we see focus groups being used as the core evaluation and research tool within a web design project. Why!?

Focus groups are in the main used to evaluate and get recommendations from customers on the proof of concepts or prototypes. They have a strength in gathering people’s judgements, emotions and possible interactive scenarios from the group as a whole.

If you don’t know I have no love for focus groups, I have yet to see them produce any results that have not been tainted or saturated in biases. To the extent that they were just unusable. With the research or evaluation having to be conducted by some other technique later on in the project. Often at an extra expense.

Why use Focus Groups

If focus groups are so great why are we still using them. Well mainly we are still using them due to several business driven factors:

• Cost

  The biggest cost overall factor for all research methods is the cost of the consultant. Hence consider the cost of 1 focus group session verses 15 interviews at 1 hour each, plus transcription and analysis. You can se why they are attractive.

• Ease of implementation

  Compared to ethnographic studies, the easy of gathering a group of customers or stakeholders is a very attractive factor. You have them there all in one room, and even a few hours later you have an outcome. Quick and easy.

• Previously Known Technique

  I have found that often marketing firms will use this method and rebrand it as user research. Mainly because they see it as a trusted and tried technique and maybe they are under the misguided priniciple that market research is vary similar to customer (user) research.

The Issues

The issues all stem from the social interactions of the focus group. People after all for the norm are sociable, this can be a big issue. But it’s not the only issue:

• Qualitative Results

  The information gathered from the focus group will be at best qualitative in nature, while this is good to give a strategic direction for an emotion response. It’s not what we are after overall. We need cold hard evidence more often than not.

• What Customers Say

  To often, as we know, customers will tell you they would do one thing, but when observed they in fact do something completely different. This alteration of the discussed “reality” and the observed reality is extenuated by the group think process.

• Group Think

  People tend to react differently when you get them in a group situation then what they do when you have then alone. Its the usual social dynamics in play, domination, pecking orders, social personality masking and so on. No matter how good a moderator is, they can’t stop the group think process from taking hold, they can only lessen it. Hence people will further suppress ideas, concept or critique in the fear of it’s not exceptable by the group. Focus groups in this way are lot like a jury without evidence.

• Domination

  All it takes is a very dominate personality in a focus group and this will taint the group outcome dramatically. To the point that you are just in fact reporting on the view point of the dominate individuals.

• In Depth Examination

  Yes focus groups can provide some in-depth group examination of issues. However there just isn’t the process to dig deeper into an issue and follow the trail to some of the core issues, as say would be examined in a one on one interview or ethnographic study.

  Yes you can have a good moderator who can reduce these aspects. However overall they are still going to occur, just to a lesser degree. How much of a lesser degree will depend on the experience and skills of the moderator.

The Alternatives

It’s all very good dismissing focus groups out of hand, but what are the alternatives:

• User Testing

  Nothing beats user testing, working with the participants one on one, observing them. Reducing the bias via carefully worded questions on a pre determined scenario that you are evaluating. All the social issues, bias and the like are removed. Remember user testing doesn’t have to be expensive, it can be done in a very cost effectively. It’s just a matter of audience and budgetary scope.

• Interviews

  When you are using a focus group to gather scenario or even user type data, you really would be better off with a series of interviews, even short ones. If you you suspect that your interview will be too short to cover all your bases then consider priming the participants before hand.

• Participatory Design

  This really isn’t that new if you have been following a real customer focused design approach. If you are of the system design school then it maybe a little radical.

  Basically you let the customers design the product for you. Under the guiding hands of the design, development and business teams of course. Why should you be considering that all the good ideas are going to come from your team of designers, and then have them evaluated by the customers. Why not bring a key number of customers along for the journey of the design process. (I’m going to pester you more on this topical later in another post.)

• Collaborative Analysis

  This allows a group of customers, usually one for each persona, the deisgn team, and client to evaluate a design or the like. The process allows for placement of the personas (customer) one at a time in centre stage and have them evaluate the design from their view point. Ultimately the customers will also assist in the design process, contributing to alternatives and the solving of any problems.

  The design team and client are only present in terms of an advisory role on any recommendations that is forth coming.

So maybe you like or even love focus groups; fine that is good.

However next time you go to use them, just stop and think about the altenatives. Is a focus group really going to serve you well.

What do you think are focus groups a waste of time or are they the best thing since sliced bread. You tell me.

Some of you may not have heard of design or project walls, they have been around for a while in various disguises like design cubicles,  design studios, information radiators, UX walls and the like.

This is where you can spread your UX artefacts,  your documentation of the project and the principles of the design out onto a wall for all to see.    You can put on the wall your key points from user research, map user stories, card sorts, inspirational competitors designs, task stories,  task flows and maps, afffinity diagrams, persona, storyboards, sketches, wireframes, feature lists,  burndown chart and so on; you get the idea.

It’s all on the wall physically in front of you, it’s really easy to see the big picture at a glance.

This technique presents a very transparent view of the project which can be review by the team, the client’s executive or anyone walking past with easy.   In fact it’s ideal for the client to comment and annotate a design wall.

Yes these walls can take up a lot of space, which is an issue I always have.   However you can use temporary foam-core walls, or put up wrapping paper sheets on the wall.  I recommend wrapping paper over butchers paper as it has higher weight and it’s tougher, and easier to get on large wholesale rolls.  You can also take down the wall, and roll it up and set them up at the client’s site.

Going Remote

Now this is great if the client is in the same city as you are.  But what happens when they aren’t.   We have remote research, remote prototypes, distributed teams, so can we do a remote design wall, a virtual design wall so to speak.

No I don’t have solution for this, yet.   So maybe you can help me:

Is there way to do a remote design wall?

Ideally we want something that is:

• Easy to use, almost a drag and drop method of construction for putting items on the wall.
• The ability to zoom in and out of the wall to see all the features on it.
• Lots of space, so you can scroll the page vertically or horizontal
• The ability to annotate, comment,  and scribble on the wall.
• Time stamping items as they are added, so you have an audit trail.
• Secure, password protect.

Now you can get online mood boards, and client sign-off facilitators, but what we really want it something where you can see the wall in it’s entirity on your screen and can zoom in on a specific  examine aspect of it.   What we need is an online prezi presentation application as a design page.

So what do you think, is it possible, or is there something already in place? Is there a virtual design wall online service?

There seems to be a bit of a trend at the moment, within developmental circles to just add a  few wireframes and develop a prototype or two, and then you can declare you are across the user experience design process.

The thing is User Experience is a lot more than just a few simple techniques, it’s an entire collaborative design process, in a way it’s not just a single methodology at all.

This lack of being a single methodology may be part of the issue.

For too long in developmental circles,  the promise of the perfect project was always dangled as the golden prize for simply following a given methodology step by step.  UX does in a way, pull the rug out from under that old school attitude.

Limiting the Scope

It is easy to understand that the adoption of wireframes can aid in design,  and that prototypes assist in the development process and  can act as an additional communication tool.   This is true.

However  when theses techniques are only applied to staged design approach they just capturing the design alternatives, by an iterative  prototyping process.  This is all they do, they don’t provide anything more.

To consider that these techniques alone take into account the entire User Experience design process is just flawed.

If one just applied these two design techniques, then the entire aspect of the “user” can still be very easily  forgotten.

The adding in of new software tool that allows for wireframes and collaborative client signoff  is providing a greater scope than before, but it’s still not UX design.

Wireframes should be tested with the users, as should the prototype. However in reality it’s just too easy to only reference the client and their response to your design.

Remember the Users

One must remember that User Experience is about the experience of the users.

Not the designers, developers or the client.

Yes I know it’s an obvious thing, but sometimes we  forget this in an effort to find a single methodical solution we can trust.

The core of any user experience process is the design with the users, for the users. It’s about the conversation with the users:

• The collection of the user research.
• The non bias user testing, with users, without leading scenario presentation and questioning.
• The interviewing of users, and the collecting of their user stories.
• The analysis of their previous trails through a web site and general web analytics.
• The previous experiences and expectations of the users, the mapping of their mental models.

I can understand that championing of the user and business goals, wants, and previous experiences can be  difficult to comes to terms with.

This is especially  true when you are used to the straight forward cycle of business requirements and client input, and a few intrative cycles.

Also the direct involvement with selected users, for a development team maybe difficult. However this is where User Experience professionals can help, as they can bridge that User, Business and Developer gap.

Still the application of the user research and it’s confirmation via user testing is the critical aspect of the entire user experience process. It has to be done.

It’s not a simple matter of plugging in a few new techniques.  You have to consider the user, talk to the user, “be the user”, develop and design with the user in a collaborative effort.  This is the user experience process.

No matter how much we want to avoid it, we have to engage with the users, anything else is not working with the UX design process.

Some of you may not know this, I come from a formal science background, I trained as a scientist.  However, I don’t consider myself to be one, by any stretch of the imagination. I feel more at home in the design space.

Still all that background in the science arena has allowed me to apply it to the area of User Experience design. A guess it’s like a Science of UX Design.

To often we say that the area of User Experience is not so much a science but an art. Yes this is true. However it’s also a little wrong. UX Design is very much a science, or should be. As we are applying the basis of the scientific method to it.

To understand this you have to understand a little about backbone of science (science peeps you can go make a coffee now) and the scientific method.

Science and the Art of Observation

In science you are taught from day one to question. Yes question everything. This questioning helps you think creativity, build on previous ideas, observe, experiment and document. The key is to take nothing on face value. You are always asking , “nice, but show me the evidence..”.

Everything, you see, must come with evidence to support it. Any hypothesis has to have some evidence. And even then it’s going to have to be collaborated evidence so it can graduate to a theory.

You see a theory is the best you can get, its the ultimate statement.  Still you have to remember that a theory is not written in stone, it’s still open to change.  It should still be questioned, if the evidence stacks up against it.

A theory is just in a holding status, as the series of rules or an explanation of how something works as far as we know. The key here is the bit “as far as we know”.   At any time it can to shot down and a new theory can replace it.  Often the new theory is build upon the bones of the old theory, but not all the time, something a complete change of viewpoint is required.

Scientific Method

The important part in science in the use of the Scientific Method. The basis of the scientific method is a way to use the principles of scientific inquiry.  It’s the cycle of taking a hypotheses, testing it , analysing the results and then iterating,

The key to the scientific method is the use of the researchers intelligence, imagination, and creativity; its not like baking a cake,  there is no quick recipe to follow.  A bit like UX design in a way.

If we compare the two, the scientific method and UX design

UX Design verses Scientific Method

• Scientific Method:

  1. Define a question or problem,
  2. Gather information or observe,
  3. Form a hypothesis,
  4. Experiment and test,
  5. Analyse output,
  6. Interpret results (form new hypothesis),
  7. Document and publish,
  8. Peer review

• UX Design:

  1. Define a question or problem,
  2. Observe and research,
  3. Develop a design,
  4. User test and prototype,
  5. Analyse and interpret results,
  6. Document,
  7. Implement

As you can see they are very similar. All we are lacking is the formation of the initial hypothesis.

Science isn’t Creative?

Okay I can guess you are nodding your heads now as you see the comparison. However it’s not that simple is it?

Yes true design has all these principles and rules that can be applied. Same with UX design there are a number of for an interface design and psychological based principle that we can apply.   These rules are like the foundation theorems in science.

However design has that creative element. The innovative spark, the creation of something based on previous experience and the environment around us. Something that is gauged as being outstanding by our community. The process of that creativity and what it is can be always up for debate. However the key here is that design is a creative process not an analytical one.

And science isn’t!? …  Hang on let’s stop and think for a moment.

Okay design stimulates the senses and it’s this stimulation that we often use to measure creativity by.

However in science you still get that moment of innovation, the moment of thinking outside the square, the  moment of creativity, it’s just it’s not applied often to something that is traditionally thought of being creative. 

Looking at a physics equation a new way, or experimenting with a variations in compounds are the sexy creative elements but they can be creative in there approaches.

So yes science is creative.  Just not sexy creative, as is commonly known.

Science is Design

In UX design we prototype and experiment, observe the results, iterate and modify the prototypes using the test results and previous designs to find the new killer design. As you can see above, this is so close to the iterative experimental process of scientific method  it’s a little frightening. 

Mind you lets just stop for moment again.  If you think about it, it’s not surprising,  given that many of the principles of UX design are stolen from engineering which in turn stole them from basis of the scientific method.

So in reality UX design is a Science.  And maybe even Science is just Design.

Now tell me do you think UX design is more a science or do you still think its going with the gut and is an art form?

Being challenged to find the design, to produce a professional product within the bounds of the clients specifications. However moving through the process rapidly does allow you to focus on how you achieve your final outcome.

One thing I have learn over the years is to never jump right into photoshop. Regardless as to whether you have used mood boards or not, generally I don’t start the design process in photoshop or the like. I take it back old school, get out the sketch pad and paper. Walk away from the workstation, often outside and go design the site with pencils and paper.

So how do I move from paper to photoshop:

1. Leveraging off the base wireframe (if I have one), I set about drawing about ten or so different design thumbnails of the pages. I use these to generate ideas very quickly, to just to see if they balance and work generally on the grid and in terms of spacial placement.
2. From here I select the designs that are going to work. These are then expanded into half page lead pencil sketches, again nothing intense, just seeing if the design works in this low-fi version.
3. Finally a few designs are drawn up in detail with aqualia coloured pencils. Again not in fine detail, just concepts, and block of colour to see if the design works.
4. After all this the design is manually rebuild for client sign off in photoshop. In some cases I do this via a rough tablet trace or a simple scan, or just by eye, all depends on the design.

There is something freeing about working with paper. Don’t get me wrong I don’t work in a vacuum of ideas, I have my reference books and library at hand and will often go looking for inspiration. But of late the inspiration has not come from the online world, but the offline.

So what is your design process? How do you start the process? Straight onto the computer or do you go old school?

During last week I got to see Jared Spool keynote at IAsummit via a streaming into Second Life. Okay its wasn’t that great, the streaming not the presentation. After reviewing the presentation later. It’s apparent to me that some people maybe missing the point of methodologies.

Jared’s core comments are summed up well by Mia Northrop and Molly from NLC Internet Marketing Blog, basically he proposes that we should be moving away from UCD and start to own up to the point that we haven’t really been practicing it anyway. Thumps up Jared.

But if you think about it, does it matter. In reality a practical modern methodology should not be a collection of reliant steps with supplementary techniques and tools that are all interdependent.

Screw the Users

Shouldn’t any design approach be aligned to the bottom line. The business direction or vision of the organisation, this in turn should be reflected in the website. Generally you’re not going to get the project surviving if it’s not inline with the goals of the organisation.

After all, to be honest, does it really matter what the user wants. Yes and no. Sure improve the process for the user, but if the user requirements are too far removed from the organisational vision is there any point. We have either the wrong audience or an organisation morphing its direction. Which if you think about it is the same thing.

Before you get all UX zealot on me. Yes, sure the user experience is important, but only at the micro level of the process, products and procedures. But on the macro level it has to come down to the organisation goal. After we have provided the goal we can then look at supplementary services for providing the user requirements.

The Process

From my experience the process in which this is done is not a standardised traditional approach. This type of methodology died with the mainframe and the old 25 volume developmental methodologies.

Now it’s just the application of a holistic toolbox of techniques, tools and short course methods or defined micro processes. Any good team will apply them as require, mixing them in and out as required, iterating the process as required.

As expect this toolbox is applied depending on the budget and scope of the project. There is a distinct difference in the delivery of a UX for a $3000 site verses a $30,000 one. But that said still very core of the UX should be presented and implemented no matter what the budget. How you do this is a topic for a future post.

Jared’s comments are amusing from my localised view point. For many organisations UCD is an unknown so it’s a little amusing to hear UCD being retired, when some aren’t even there yet.

So is Jared just stating what we have all really been doing for years or is it a little more. Is this just UX and UCD spun into one package?

The slideshare presentation is below.

| View | Upload your own

We have all had it. You know the scenario, the base concept design is due today, you have just started. Nothing is inspiring you, it’s all the old same old thing. The blank page looks back at you mockingly, laughing.

You sit there trying to visual something, anything new, all you get is nothing, an emptiness that is as vast as the canvas you are working on. The clock numbers slip by endlessly, click click. it too is laughing at you, it knows about the deadline.

There is a feeling of dread that is knotting up deep within the pit of your stomach. A spike of panic and urgency, your heart is racing, you are sweating, you must get the design done today!

The waking nightmare begins. A fifty foot wall is enclosing around you, blocking out the creativity, sapping your light, your muse. The world has become just a mundane darkening grey uncreative void. Panic!

So what do I do when the web designers block comes down:

• Stop.

  First off stop. put the blank paper, Photoshop canvas, or page aside, close it even. Review what you have in terms of input (logos, colours etc). Rotate them, invert them, flip them, color inverse them, zoom in. Look for themes, patterns or make up a colour pallet if one is not supplied.

• Getup, walk away.

  This is a simple solution. Calm down, to do this get up walk away from your desk, go outside, get a drink. go for walk down the street. Take in the sights, smells, the sounds away from your work environment. Try to mentally reset yourself, clear your head. Some of my best ideas come in checkout queues or just driving around. However, not a good solution if time is extremely short.

• Visit other web sites.

  Go have a look at some inspirational designs, maybe go look at the work of you favourite designer. Or visit some CSS galleries. Good ideas sure, but remember take only inspiration, no one likes a thief.

• Start. Just do it.

  If you have the wireframe, fine you have a starting point. Even if you don’t, start with a rough sketch. Doodle, throw a series of thumbnails together. Just get in there and put pencil to paper, draw, play. You may see something in the mess on your page that will leap frog you into the design process. It maybe a curve, a colour, an outline, a font, I don’t have a magic bullet on this one, but you will often see a way forward if you have something to look at and mentally churn over.

• Set a deadline.

  Sometimes it’s not “designer block, it’s just procrastination. So putting a deadline in place, this does help you kick start yourself. Not much good if you are already on a deadline, eh.

• Change media

  Go watch a movie, music video or play some console games. Often you will get inspiration from a different media. But my personal mega block breaker is music. Turn on any music. I find it best to try and find some music for the theme you are looking for, let the music entrance you and feel the vibe, let your imagination be inspired by the music. Different people design various themes to certain music types. This is such a detailed topic that I’m not going to cover it all here. Mind you some people tell me music only helps them work and does not inspire them.

• Mood Boards

  You are using mood boards? Well maybe not on the small jobs. But they do help on the larger ones to set the tone of the design. To set the theme, the colours, fonts and style of the visualisation. They are quick, they are dirty and they are great starting leverage point in the design process.

• Word play

  Take random words and content themes from the site, mix these up, select a few randomly, look at the emotion and design these words reflect and start from there.

• Take it to the extreme

  Okay you have a design, but it’s just lame, and boring, it just says that you have no creativity at all. Well why don’t you try and go for the extreme opposite of what you want. Make it even more boring and dull. Break the rules on the colour pallet. Make some of the elements way too big, break out of the design mold, go crazy. It may just lead you to a new concept away from the every day mundane design you already have.

• Build a Reference library

  I know these are out of favour, and so old school. But a physical collection of design inspirational books, magazines, photos can be a really godsend when you have a creative block. It gets you away from the computer, and you start to look a things on different level. Allowing your subconscious to take hold and wander aimlessly. I’ll often find just one picture or drawing that will inspire a complete web site design.

Besides the resulting burnout aspect what do you do to overcome designer block.