Posts Tagged ‘design’


Designing for Situations

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

“When we think only in terms of inherent traits and forget the role of situations, we’re deceiving ourselves about the real causes of human behavior.” ~Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping Point

Whether you call it user experience design, user-centered design, or human-computer interaction, there is always a strong emphasis on the person and how they behave. This makes it very easy to get caught up in demographics and perceived consistent behaviors. By “consistent behaviors” I mean that we tend to think that behavioral traits in a person, such as introversion, are present regardless of the situation. However, there are numerous studies that indicate the exact opposite — that our behaviors are incredibly inconsistent and very sensitive to the situation and environment. The situation we are in not only effects how we think about things, it also plays a major role in how we conduct ourselves and how we make decisions.

In user experience design, making blanket statements about behavioral traits (e.g. “Jane is an introvert”) can lead to wrong assumptions about how this person will use a product you are designing. All you have to do is look at the self-proclaimed introvert who is extremely active on social networks to see how situational changes can drastically effect behavior. It is incredibly important to design for situations, not just for demographics or so-called personality traits. Don’t just design for user x, design for user x in situation y.


Want to create better products? Be open-minded.

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009

“The greatest designers are those who can change their minds exceptionally well.” – Chris Fahey, quoted in an article for UX Matters by Whitney Hess.

To create great products, you must have an open mind. If you are not willing to accept new ideas — or data that contradicts your current point of view — you will fail to find the best solution. If you are too attached to a particular design, you will fall victim to it and find yourself unable to see the potential of other viable ideas.

In user experience design, we often practice something called “parallel design”: we have multiple designers try to come up with a solution for the same problem, completely independent of one another. The result is a wider array of potential solutions that are uninfluenced by the others. But this exercise requires that each designer can 1) defend their design (“this is why I think this works”), and 2) be open-minded enough to change their mind if another solution (or an element of another solution) is better.

Failure to see the value of another solution will only lead to inferior design, and consequently, an inferior product.