Relief. That it is all over. But well, maybe not quite for there is definitely the need to apply the knowledge and skills acquired for the near future. Nonetheless, in the process of walking through this course, countless number of "huh?" surfaces but eventually was pretty much understood. I wouldn't say that I understood all the concepts and ideas 100% but I guess good and well enough to apply for any future uses. I think in order to fully grasp half of the concepts taught, the utmost important thing is experience itself. As a greenhorn, I can't give fascinating insights to the general concept of the elusive term - user experience. But having to go through this course has no doubt make me much more 'user sensitive' and not take good products for granted. It has given me the chance to be in the designer shoes, and realise that being a designer, half the time you are blind to obvious issues. And there is when user testing is so important. It helps to enlighten me in seeing what is supposedly obvious and I could have spotted if I am the user.
The course has definitely equip me with more tricks (user research methodologies) in my bag (my favourite is laddering!). However, I may get too obsessed with all the methods at times and forgot about what was truly meant to be. For instance, having seen groups with great quantitative research backings, I felt threatened and thought that our research was not as good. However, having read the Fahey's article, I realised there is no need to worry over it. Yes, research helps but it is not the quantity that counts, it is the quality and the abilities to make use of the pieces of information to develop the ideas that was more important in a subject matter that is ever so subjective.
All in all, if I were to use one word to describe everything, it is "HUH?" It's really hard to pinpoint and explain the overall thoughts but well, no one can say I am wrong, for 'experience is experience, it can never be wrong, it is not fact.' :p
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Reflections on Final Project
It has never been easy. But it is a wonderful experience being able to walk through the process that is ever so indefinable and different from any other subject matters. It is so taxing on the mind. Every week one has to crack the brains out trying to grasp and understand what was being taught and presented.
But lucky enough it started off pretty well. Although the start was pretty much a rough one. Times and times, ideas were being rejected, but of course with very valid reasons that the group has failed to spot. However, lucky enough, the bad ideas were rejected or the group will run into great trouble as the process develops. The most noteworthy experience in the very initial stage of project development, is the need to identify 'needs'. We have started out with the idea of the wine bottle, half the mind already deciding what has to be done for the rest of the project. Bad move i must say. Because the more thoughts given into it, the more fallible the idea became. By already deciding the end product, there is no progression or product development at all. It becomes so restrictive, and 'stuck' to be exact. And the best part is we can't answer the question: for what is there a need for such a product (i.e. collectible wine bottle with glass imprints of famous paintings)?
Following advices given, we went around asking (or begging) for 'needs' ideas, and we chance upon the good idea on news consumption (applicable to myself, I don't enjoy reading news though I know it's a must and it's important) which eventually became our main idea.
It started off being quite fun because there is never a correct answer to the idea of 'experience' but it becomes such a drag having to go through hard to grasp ideas and concepts. Nonetheless the steps were necessary for the project to progress.
Having no prior experience in such product/service development projects, it is strenuous getting even the low fidelity prototypes done. We were pretty clueless of what has to be done, but went ahead with it in the spirit of trial and error (so we will gain experience and learn from it). Lucky enough, we managed to get through and obtain very valuable options that we failed to see.
The toughest part of the project is coming up the high fidelity prototype. Not in the designing sense because we already have a clear idea of how we want the website to look and feel like. It is the technical aspect that is very taxing. Nonetheless it is great to have walk it through. Because an idea will always be an idea. It will be stuck on the paper as words, and that is the end of the story without making the extra step to realise it. Even though it is still slightly different from what was in mind due to technical knowledge impediments, the concept and the feel of the prototype has achieved what was intended. Additionally, it is such a valuable experience for having to learn how to use the programs. One has the 'rough' feel of what can or cannot be done, and not have wonderful ideas that can never be realised. Only one word can be used to describe such wonderful but non-executable ideas - useless.
Weeks after weeks of refinements, and going through all the critiques, the sense of satisfaction in completing the project is no doubt a great one (even though we don't have that nice a flash website compared to the FLASH programmers group :p haha). But I guess we did still fulfill the needs and what was intended to and that was utmost important.
But lucky enough it started off pretty well. Although the start was pretty much a rough one. Times and times, ideas were being rejected, but of course with very valid reasons that the group has failed to spot. However, lucky enough, the bad ideas were rejected or the group will run into great trouble as the process develops. The most noteworthy experience in the very initial stage of project development, is the need to identify 'needs'. We have started out with the idea of the wine bottle, half the mind already deciding what has to be done for the rest of the project. Bad move i must say. Because the more thoughts given into it, the more fallible the idea became. By already deciding the end product, there is no progression or product development at all. It becomes so restrictive, and 'stuck' to be exact. And the best part is we can't answer the question: for what is there a need for such a product (i.e. collectible wine bottle with glass imprints of famous paintings)?
Following advices given, we went around asking (or begging) for 'needs' ideas, and we chance upon the good idea on news consumption (applicable to myself, I don't enjoy reading news though I know it's a must and it's important) which eventually became our main idea.
It started off being quite fun because there is never a correct answer to the idea of 'experience' but it becomes such a drag having to go through hard to grasp ideas and concepts. Nonetheless the steps were necessary for the project to progress.
Having no prior experience in such product/service development projects, it is strenuous getting even the low fidelity prototypes done. We were pretty clueless of what has to be done, but went ahead with it in the spirit of trial and error (so we will gain experience and learn from it). Lucky enough, we managed to get through and obtain very valuable options that we failed to see.
The toughest part of the project is coming up the high fidelity prototype. Not in the designing sense because we already have a clear idea of how we want the website to look and feel like. It is the technical aspect that is very taxing. Nonetheless it is great to have walk it through. Because an idea will always be an idea. It will be stuck on the paper as words, and that is the end of the story without making the extra step to realise it. Even though it is still slightly different from what was in mind due to technical knowledge impediments, the concept and the feel of the prototype has achieved what was intended. Additionally, it is such a valuable experience for having to learn how to use the programs. One has the 'rough' feel of what can or cannot be done, and not have wonderful ideas that can never be realised. Only one word can be used to describe such wonderful but non-executable ideas - useless.
Weeks after weeks of refinements, and going through all the critiques, the sense of satisfaction in completing the project is no doubt a great one (even though we don't have that nice a flash website compared to the FLASH programmers group :p haha). But I guess we did still fulfill the needs and what was intended to and that was utmost important.
Reflections on "User Research Smoke & Mirrors"
The steps to creating 'user experience' has all along be indefinable. After reading the Fahey's reading, it has certainly reinforces the idea of having no rule of thumb to even the very basic step of researching on the users in the process. However, at the same time the article has caused even more uncertainty and 'insecurity' or so to speak, with the ever hard to grasp term being even more intangible with its subjectivity being highlighted.
I think humans are never comfortable with things that are intangible and indefinable (probably that is why they often call painters/artists mad), and thus, have absolute reliance on facts and figures, math and science. Upon meeting such a elusive subject, they started grabbing all possible ways to pull the concept to the ground and nail it tightly so they are able to grasp and explain the term 'experience' with (statistics) confidence. It is indeed laughable looking at how the eyetracking has been used by misguided people. It all comes to prove that they simply can't live without hard ground facts.
I think Fahey has made a very good point that it is alright to have all these scientific methods lying around as options to be used as thinking tools but not the foundation of things. Seeing research as pieces of information to be used to plan design and not a measurement of effectiveness definitely allows more room for creativity and thinking. The tendency to focus and rely on specific statistically proven 'problem' will often lead to blindness to what is supposedly obvious.
Awe as can be, I was truly amazed by the creation of 'persona rooms'. As argued by Fahey, it may indeed be not worth the money, but I guess big organizations employ such [in]famous methods as part of their publicity. Imagine: "Company XYZ has spent $$millions on creating persona rooms to help facilitate their design process..." How much face value is being churned out here?
Although subjectivity is being much appreciated (makes it alot easier to argue for things when opinions differs; one just can say 'oh it's a matter of perception, no one can be wrong or right'), it is at the same time disturbing. Because one can never be sure of what to employ for the steps to designing (experience) and whether things will be successful. Uncomfortable with the idea, but I guess it is inevitable since appreciation of design and art has all along never be something tangible. Accepting and appreciating the nature of such subject matters is far better than being the misguided soul who tries to nail everything down with facts and lose the way amongst the 'smoke'.
I think humans are never comfortable with things that are intangible and indefinable (probably that is why they often call painters/artists mad), and thus, have absolute reliance on facts and figures, math and science. Upon meeting such a elusive subject, they started grabbing all possible ways to pull the concept to the ground and nail it tightly so they are able to grasp and explain the term 'experience' with (statistics) confidence. It is indeed laughable looking at how the eyetracking has been used by misguided people. It all comes to prove that they simply can't live without hard ground facts.
I think Fahey has made a very good point that it is alright to have all these scientific methods lying around as options to be used as thinking tools but not the foundation of things. Seeing research as pieces of information to be used to plan design and not a measurement of effectiveness definitely allows more room for creativity and thinking. The tendency to focus and rely on specific statistically proven 'problem' will often lead to blindness to what is supposedly obvious.
Awe as can be, I was truly amazed by the creation of 'persona rooms'. As argued by Fahey, it may indeed be not worth the money, but I guess big organizations employ such [in]famous methods as part of their publicity. Imagine: "Company XYZ has spent $$millions on creating persona rooms to help facilitate their design process..." How much face value is being churned out here?
Although subjectivity is being much appreciated (makes it alot easier to argue for things when opinions differs; one just can say 'oh it's a matter of perception, no one can be wrong or right'), it is at the same time disturbing. Because one can never be sure of what to employ for the steps to designing (experience) and whether things will be successful. Uncomfortable with the idea, but I guess it is inevitable since appreciation of design and art has all along never be something tangible. Accepting and appreciating the nature of such subject matters is far better than being the misguided soul who tries to nail everything down with facts and lose the way amongst the 'smoke'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)