Notes to seminar 1 - Isabella

I found chapter two to be the most interesting chapter to read since I did not know there where four ways of handling interaction design projects. The four approaches are; user-centered design (UCD), activity-centered design (ACD), systems design and genius design. I think that all of them have advantages but also disadvantages, which I think could however be compensated by mixing them. At the end of the chapter the writer recommends the reader to not simply focus on one of the approaches while designing but to keep a flexible and open mind on switching and mixing approaches as the situation changes. I agree with the author on this point and think it could be useful to move between different approaches while doing our project. But I’m wondering if there are any disadvantages by doing so? Could things go wrong, and if so, why?

Design research was discussed in chapter four and explained as a research with the purpose of raising the products chances of being user friendly and fulfill the users needs. Using screeners, to sort out uninteresting subjects, and moderator scripts, to make sure the right question are asked, is something I think could come in handy while doing our research later on. Except for that, most of the content felt as things you already know about although it’s good to sometimes get a reminder of that it’s ideally to have four pens.

The last chapter presented different ways of structuring the collected data from the design research. There are some very good tips in this chapter on how you can break the collected data into small parts so it becomes easier to analyze and remember it.

Notes to Reading seminar 1 19/9-14 Carl Sténson

There are four different approaches to interaction design; User-design, Activity-centered design, System design and Genius Design (also called Rapid Expert design). When working most people tends to prefer one of them, but it is preferable to be able to change during a project to see everything from a different angle. One thing that is of high importance for all of the four approaches is to know your final users’ needs. User-centered design always takes the user in consideration, while Activity-centered design focus on the users’ tasks and activities that needs to be accomplished. System design on the other hand focus mainly on the components of the system to create a clear roadmap of what should be accomplished (it still has to know what the user wants to accomplish). The last approach is a bit different than the other in the way that it does not include any research of the users. Instead it is dependent on the designer’s skill, wisdom and experience. The designer makes a couple of assumptions of the future users and makes a design he/she think will satisfy them. This approach is probably the fastest and least expensive but it also includes a higher risk of a failure due to the subjective judgment (lack of research).

Research is important, especially for unexperienced designers, to get to know the users’ needs, requirements and environment. When doing research it is important to remember that things you hear twice do not have to be the opinion of all users a rule is that if you hear it three times it is a pattern. It is also important to not ask leading questions instead try to get them to tell you a story of an experienced situation. When you got the data it is important to analyze your findings to be able to take advantage of the made research in the design. Try to find pain points, opportunities and Call to actions. It is also a good Idea to create Personas to characterize your future users.

During the design work it is important to stay open-minded and keep several tracks/ideas open and to evaluate your work continuously to keep track of that you working towards your goal.

How should we evaluate our work during the project to always keep the future user in our mind?

Welcome to our blog!

*hihi*