Picture My World

We recently switched cell phone providers and got a Siemens A56 phone (can’t find it on Siemens’ web site, but it’s similar to the A55). Over the first few days we used the phone, we grew so frustrated by its many usability flaws we traded it in for a more expensive model from Sony Ericsson. This is a mini-review of the major issues we had with the phone.

• The menu structure was inscrutable. Neither my wife nor I could easily find settings or functions. We don’t have this problem on our Nokia or Ericsson phones.
• Some of the settings had 3 states. On (checked), off (unchecked), and I-have-no-idea (question mark). The phone didn’t seem to know if it was forwarding calls or not. Strange.
• You could adjust the volume during a call, but only by pressing the middle button. You know… the one pressed up against your face.
• The left soft key can be programmed (to call a number, check messages, etc). However, whenever you press it, the phone asks if you want to proceed with that function or change the hot key. Now I see (as I look at the online manual) that you need to press and hold the button to bypass that dialog. They sure got that functionality backwards, even though it’s consistent with how the programmable number keys work.
• The phonebook had 3 groups that always sat at the top of the list. We never figured out how to remove the groups, which you would have to scroll by to get to the entries you cared about. This was the most annoying issue.

I think this is the first time I’ve returned a product simply because of usability issues. Usually, I can get by but these problems convinced me to pay an extra $25 + shipping for a much more user-friendly phone.

I can’t sleep.

The unfortunate thing about not making my blog anonymous is that I cannot write about the reason(s) why I cannot sleep.

The question is: Should I attempt to get something productive done or simply wait for sleep to come?

I don’t know whether this is a good idea or not. I received an email asking if I want to subscribe to various email newsletters. Here’s what I’m supposed to do:

Please reply to this message, marking your choice with an X

• ‘I want to receive Noldus News, your printed newsletter’
• ‘I want to receive Noldus Newsline, your digital newsletter’
• ‘I want to receive both Noldus News & Noldus Newsline’

My initial reaction was, “Mark it where?” I realize it probably doesn’t matter, but I can imagine how I’d parse the reply.

Using a paper analogy doesn’t always work, but maybe it would in this case. However, It still “feels” weird.

–

A more substantive entry should come soon, but it’s been a hell of a week. Have a good weekend.

I got an email the other day advertising PlanetHCI. It’s a feed aggregator focussing on HCI issues. However, they have a few feeds that are low on HCI and high in personal or other issues. I wrote to one of the admins complaining about the falling signal to noise ratio and he replied that they are working on filtering the feeds, but it sounds like it will take some time.

In the meantime, I think I will scan the PlanetHCI for interesting new sites and add them to my news reader so I can avoid the noise.

Back from Chicago.

We did a very interesting usability test. Unfortunately, I can’t write about it since it’s for an unreleased product. What I can say is that it tested a software design that attempts to solve a very complex problem. There was definitely friction between the users’ understanding of the problem and our solution, so we’ll have to do better. It was the first time I tried a hybrid paper/software prototype test and it seemed to work quite well even though users bounced between paper and computer many times during the session.

What’s the most conceptually difficult design you’ve worked on and/or tested with users? How did it go?

On the way home from Chicago I saw:

On the plane, two legs leaning against the bulk head in business class. I guess this guy was working on his circulation.

On the road, an articulated bus (full of passengers) and Toyota Matrix pulled to the side of the road. The two drivers were exchanging information and looking at the damage. It appeared the Toyota drove into the rear corner of the bus, and guess which vehicle showed it?

Nice to be home.

I’m off to Chicago for a usability test, so my already sparse posts will be sparser.

Ron, I’ll answer your questions in a couple of days.

My foot.

Ron comments in a previous post that design issues should be addressed before usability work. (For the sake of this discussion, I’m drawing a border between design and usability; however, this division is often fuzzy and I acknowledge that).

How do you know your design is bad (whether it’s process, result, or a combination)? And, if it is bad, how do you get your organization to acknowledge the problem and correct it?

Design is hard. Unfortunately it’s also subjective, leading many designers to assume their designs are good, even when they are not. Often, any problems can be ignored because your product’s other strengths overcome them (e.g., it has unique features, a strong sales force pushing it, etc). Any reports of difficult interfaces are dismissed because, bottom line, it’s profitable. This is the case in many growth industries where commodification hasn’t set in, yet. I think it’s also a factor when the buyer is not the primary user (the situation for most of my company’s products).

So if you have a profitable product and you’re not getting a lot of flak, then do you really have a design or usability problem? Well you probably don’t have a crisis, but you can still do better. Poor design may not be costing sales, but it’s probably costing more to train and support than it could.

In Institutionalization of Usability, Eric Schaffer lists a number of “wake-up calls” that might cause a company to reassess their current practices and adopt a user-centered approach. One example is the “train wreck” but my company hasn’t experienced that. Another wake-up is usability testing. Once development has seen usability test results (or, better yet, observed a test) they will come around and adopt new processes.

To address Ron’s point directly, this is why I’m focusing on usability before design. Having woken up myself, I’m providing the wake-up call for my company. Thanks to my background as a software engineer and the respect gained from being one of “them”, it’s been relatively easy to convince the engineers I’ve worked with so far of usability’s benefits. I am in the middle of making the pitch to middle and upper management and this is where I’m encountering resistance. (As I write this, I realize a great way to overcome this issue is to invite management to observe a test — duh).

I believe its easier to work within an organization’s structure and change it slowly. I think introducing more user-centered activities will benefit development even if the design processes or staff take a while to change. For example, I’ve done paper prototype usability testing early on with some projects and these tests have pointed out fundamental design problems. We’ve been able to nip these problems in the bud. Just the process of preparing for paper prototype tests has forced the engineers to consider important design decisions they may have postponed.

Another bump I’ve hit on the road to usability is the question, “Would development team X prefer another developer or a usability engineer?” The person asking this question generally answers, “Probably a developer.” After all, a developer can add more stuff quicker.

I’m coming to see that the question is fallacious. Why don’t people ask, “Would team X prefer another developer or a tester/doc writer/name-your-well-accepted-role?” The obvious answer is because those roles are recognized as being crucial to product development. An extra developer will create more code, maybe get an additional feature in, but at the expense of a more usable product. The counter-question when usability is challenged is to ask, “Is usability an important part of our development process?” If not, you either have to prove its worth or move along as you won’t make any progress in that environment.

However, if you think you’ve proven the benefits of usability and the question still comes up, you need to squash it early. Do not let it fester. If usability is seen as an important development component, the logical thing to do is ensure there are enough resources to cover the entire company’s development effort. Anything else means usability is only getting lip service and you haven’t made the progress you’ve thought.

As I attempt to role usability out into the wilds of my company, I sometimes get pushback that comes in the form of, “Why do we need a formal process? Shouldn’t usability be an integral part of product development like quality or reliability?”

There are two parts to that challenge. One is making usability happen and the other is ensuring it did happen. The obvious response to the second part is that if quality is ensured by a test or Q/A team, then shouldn’t usability have similar resources? That’s an easy argument to make.

The first part is more challenging since it involves changes to the way a company develops products. How do you make usability happen as an integral component of development? It sure doesn’t happen on its own and is not a technical task like coding. (A recent article and thread on OK/Cancel addressed this issue quite well.) While it’s easy to show development how a usability test pays off, it’s harder to justify the expense of user studies that aim to provide the team with a better idea of their target users.

Another aspect of usability is good design. In my company (not sure about others), most interface design is done by engineers, not experienced interaction designers. I believe better designs would come from specialists in that field, but that’s a battle I won’t be fighting for a while.

Ongoing testing or evaluation can help mitigate the lack of user research and optimum design staff. If we can test early and often, it may take a little longer to iterate to a great design, but it should be possible.

This week was pretty rough. Shula’s sleep pattern is changing and we have no clue what it’s changing to. She isn’t napping well (the slightest noise will wake her) and, as a result, she isn’t sleeping well. She used to have a dependable 2 hour morning nap, but now she’s awake through the morning. She’ll wake up 3 or 4 times a night instead of 1 or 2. She’s more cranky with less sleep, too. We’re at a bit of a loss, and this is harder on Ema than it is on me, so far. The current plan is to avoid time-based commitments this week and map out her natural nap time(s) so we can better work around her schedule.

We’ll see what happens are report back later.

I saw a flyer a couple of months ago for a “neighbourhood” web site. It turns out there is at least one other in the city. A company called Connecting Neighbours is selling these canned sites and the buyers are (surprise) real estate agents. They get their ad at the bottom of the page.

The most striking thing about these two sites is that they are empty of resident-contributed content. The Connecting Neighbours web site is full of benefits for the real estate agent, but pretty skimpy on benefits for residents (no flashy banner ads is listed as one of three points). Are these sites failing as community focal points because their basic commerciality turns visitors off, they aren’t advertised enough, or they don’t fulfil a need? [What are you talking about, Jay? Wouldn't this post on how to pump your own gas help hundreds? - Stop it. You're killing me!]

Do communities need their own web sites? There are plenty of successful community sites online such as Planet Half-Life or the BattleFront forums, but these are centered around products, not geography. People love to share information about their favourite game and such sites provide an outlet for a diverse collection of people. Sites appealing to an international user base can also tap into a small percentage of users and still create a large community.

Online communities based on a single neighbourhood have relatively few people to draw on. Not everyone is on the net and of those that are, most are probably still on dial-up connections making it inconvenient to access this site. Of the ones that might regularly access this site, how many would participate in community discussions? I’d wager quite a small number. Even contraversial issues that affect an entire city of a million people will only draw a few hundred to city hall debates. Not enough people care to get involved.

The bottom line is neighbourhood-based online communities are non-starters. The first rule of usability is to know your users and Connecting Neighbours is focusing on the buyer more than the other, larger user base. Perhaps they will be (or are) successful at what they’re doing, but that’s not building communities — it’s simply providing a sales vehicle.

I’m no expert in online communities, so I’m interested in links or feedback.

It’s amazing that babies (and kids) have trouble falling asleep if they don’t nap well. Even adults have trouble if we’re running short on sleep. But it seems to make more sense in our case since we’re often keeping ourselves awake with thoughts like, “If I fall asleep right now, I’ll get 7 hours which is just enough sleep to…” What are babies thinking to themselves? “If I could only fall asleep now I’ll be able to nap better tomorrow…”?

It doesn’t matter now. She’s asleep. Two walks totaling 1.5 hours later, anyway.

I really need an iPod. Send your donations…

Update: All that walking and she still woke up 10 minutes after I put her down. She was so deeply asleep that I was able to get her out of the sling without so much as a grunt, too. She fell asleep after another feed and was up for the morning a mere 8 hours later. Speaking of running short on sleep…

I’m contemplating splitting this blog into two (until Blogger adds categories to its feature list or I break down and switch to Moveable Type or something). I will create a new blog to hold my professional thoughts around usability and HCI. All I’m waiting for is inspiration — I need a good name for the new blog.

Update: It’s split. Visit Use Case if you care about that kind of stuff.

Shula’s been trying to roll over for a few weeks now. She seemed to take a break in the last week and a bit but started up again this morning. Rolling over is all about neck and back strength and control which is why babies can’t do it immediately. As I watch her try to roll over, it’s almost as if I can see what she’s thinking…

“I need to roll over. Maybe if I just look over there my body will follow… hmmm… not working. I bet it’s these darn legs holding me back. They’re usually out of control and flailing around. I’ll just hold them up and try to swing them to the side… I bet my body will follow. Hmm. That doesn’t work either. I need to help them out! I’ll grab one leg and pull it over. That’s got to work… Rats! I just made it onto my side, but that’s as far as I go. Ugh! This is so frustrating! Where’s my toy?!”

Of course, it could all be a ruse. She’ll roll over the moment we leave her unattended on the couch for 30 seconds.