How to better incorporate customer feedback into your engineering driven product.
Limina is often faced with products that have been in the market for years with little to no professional user centered and UI design methodology applied. It’s typically apparent in the interface before delving into the history of development through issues including but, not limited to the following examples:
inconsistent UI patterning
obtuse, or in many cases, non-existent workflows where users are either left to their own devices to develop their own approach to the system or spend time in manuals or training
random color and graphic treatments with little or no usage rationale
core features and functions hidden in right click menus with no alternative access
extensive use of dialogs and workspace changes to complete primary tasks
random and inconsistent screen layout
chop-shop iconography, cut and pasted from other applications
Most of these issues can be attributed to an engineering driven culture where usability has not been a core part of the methodology. Sure, the code is clean, the feature works, QA and Unit Tests have passed with flying colors… but is it usable or useful from an end to end experience?
A typical engineering approach to incorporating customer feedback
As a stop-gap to implementing user centered design practices, we’ve heard: “We’re meeting with our customers regularly to hear what they need and we keep them happy by feeding these requirements directly to the engineers to implement.”
First of all, we applaud you for going directly to the users with your product and taking back their requests into the design… but this is a slippery slope.
Although you may know your users and even have some working for you, how well are you capturing their needs? Are you asking the right questions? Are your users able to articulate what they need? You may have voluminous user feedback, support call logs, or error log reports on file, but have you put the user data into a framework that generates an actionable set of UI enhancements?
Equally important; when you have captured their feedback, how do you use it? Without a clear definition or roadmap for incorporating the user feedback, your product is at risk of losing competitive ground. When a company has to spend additional revenue in extensive training sessions, help documentation, call centers and product revisions, the margin of return on investment can take a massive beating.
Here are some activities to help you to incorporate user feedback into your agile development practice:
1) Give the feedback some context – What were users doing or attempting to do when they encountered the issue, and what are their roles? Usability specialists conduct a set of contextual inquiries to interview and observe users as they are performing various tasks in the context of their workplace to determine both system and non-system based activities, documents, and tools that are used to complete their tasks.
2) Quantify and qualify the user data – Where do you see common issues reaching a critical mass? Which are the exceptions and how do you prioritize them? What issues constitute a completely new set of features and possibly a new product?
3) Organize it – Once you have synthesized and prioritized the issues, determine their relationship not only to the system, but also to each other. Which comments are related and which ones are specific to a given task or feature?
The result is a set of researched usability issues that can be organized into enhancements prioritized by issue, prevalence, technical complexity, business, and user benefit.
Such a framework should be employed when embarking on a product definition or enhancement process. It allows parties from marketing, product management, and engineering to uncover the root of software design issues that challenge usability, and ultimately to gain a deeper understanding of their users. Product managers and engineers who gather and process user feedback assist their company by developing the right products and tools for their customers.
Skipping this step leads to an iterative path of organically distorting the original design of the system and frankin-hacking patches and appendages to the product to the point where rebuilding from scratch is easier than overhauling the UI when your users start running to your competitors.
There are a great many development teams using agile methods, SCRUMing it out, getting the features out the door to see what sticks. In many ways, this is a helpful model to beat the first-to-market and innovation clocks, but if the net result is revisiting the feature again and again or playing “pass the trouble ticket” from developer to developer as the feature enhancement is punted to the next iterations for months… something isn’t working.
We are all for engineering driven product teams. In most cases, massive leaps in technical innovation are paved by developer teams and individuals unhindered by business and user requirements. But we’re talking about products in the market that have ROI, user adoption, marketability, competitiveness and other business considerations to name a few.
There’s something to be said for dealing with the cost up-front; for taking the time to build a sustainable product whether in its initial incarnation or when producing the next generation of its kind, because the hidden cost of maintenance, marketing and training can work against you in the long run.
Give us your thoughts and share your experiences with us and our readers!
Years ago, various UX gurus touted the coming of the ubiquitous computer– every device would have a computer built in and they would all talk to one another. Mark Weiser coined the term while at Xerox PARC in 1988 and Alan Kay of Apple called this the “Third Paradigm”. It began with mainframe computers (one compute -> many people), followed by the personal computer (one person -> one computer), bringing us to ubiquitous computing (one person -> many computers). Ubiquitous computing can be considered the opposite of virtual reality, rather than surrounding the person within a computer-generated environment, ubiquitous computing surrounds the individual with computers (in between, lies augmented reality). In other words, computers are made to live in our world and not the other way around. Donald Norman updated the term in 1999 and used the term invisible computer and information appliance to refer to the coming revolution of devices that that would have embedded computer chips and effortlessly communicate with one another.
To some degree that has happened, even if you disregard the multiple computers that most people own (desktop, laptop, netbook) even the simple electronic devices that surround us have considerable computing power. According to futurists, my toaster should be talking with my refrigerator to know what kind of bread I have and how I like it toasted or to notify my online grocer that I only had two slices left (some of the early predictions were pretty bizarre and stretched the definition of “usefulness”). But why did their prediction fail to materialize and we’re all living in remedial houses rather than the smarthouse we were promised? Even though my appliances are much smarter than the ones my parents had there is little chatter between my toaster, coffeemaker, or any other smart appliances in my household. Most of the things I own don’t really need to communicate with one another, nor do they have much to say to Net. In fact, most of devices don’t have much to say about anything. My refrigerator still doesn’t know when I’m almost out of orange juice, though, given Tropicana’s new packaging I wish it could tell me what kind I just bought and why it was not the one I wanted. Is ubiquitous computing just one more failed prediction like fifth generation computing (expert systems) or has ubiquitous computing shifting to something else?
Apple takes an interesting two-pronged approach to ubiquitous computing, instead of everything communicating with everything else, the iPhone says – “talk to me, and I’ll talk to those that need to know” and asks “no need for multiple devices, just give me a simple focused task and I can do that.” The latter approach is familiar to everyone who has ever downloaded an app from the iTunes Store, while the former is somewhat new and is made possible by the introduction of OS 3.0 and APIs that allow for easy communication with other devices. The application approach is akin to a universal Turing machine, and the API model is more like a universal interface. It’s not quite two-pronged, rather applications are developed that allow devices to integrate seamlessly with iPhone – I consider it a different enough model as to warrant it’s unique status. For example, Johnson & Johnson made a bit of splash at the Apple developer conference with their demo of LifeScan a tool that integrates a glucose monitor with the iPhone and provides a range of features from simple visualizations of historical data to food tracking to uploading data to your healthcare provider.
Whether or not one believes the hype surrounding LifeScan (is it vaporware or will it see production?), it’s easy to imagine a range of medical devices (or any category of devices) all communicating through the iPhone, all using the iPhone’s screen and its Samsung S5PC100 processor – one person, one user interface with many devices.
I’m not sure if Apple is going to be the one that finally surrounds us with computers or smart devices, but I think their model puts us in more control than the previous one of smart appliances “deciding” for us – when to order OJ, how to toast my bread, etc. My toaster can simply communicate with my iPhone, and I can set how the bread is toasted (silly ideas never really die, they just move around the ether). I think the future is looking less like Terminator Salvation and maybe more like Star Trek [Note: It is very hard to find good science fiction movies or shows that paint a bright picture].
Big news! Apple just announced the much anticipated iPhone3G S, along with the new 3.0 platform. As usual, Apple has done a stellar job of hyping the release, providing the 3.0 SDK (Software Development Kit) to their huge following of app developers in advance, encouraging them to take advantage of the new capabilities such as copy/paste, voice dialing, compass positioning, video support with editing, and, of course, improved speed (brought to you by the letter “S”).
New iPhone3G S
These are exciting times for Mac fanatics, and for those who were waiting for the new and improved version to be released before jumping on the iPhone bandwagon. The pricing structure for newbies appears relatively reasonable and assures Apple of many new iPhone customers. However, for existing iPhone customers it’s a bit more confusing, and expensive. This is where the ever present Apple user experience gets interrupted. AT&T, in their ultimate, and very typical wisdom, are essentially punishing their customer base for upgrading to the new iPhone – by charging premiums of two or three hundred dollars for those users who haven’t yet fulfilled their 2-year contract; which by the way is practically impossible seeing as it hasn’t yet been 2 years since the iPhone was released! In other words, just when everyone is getting excited about the new iPhone, loving their experience with the brilliant Apple brand, they get hit in the face with the harsh, predictably bad experience provided by AT&T. Not only are they charging premiums for making the upgrade, but there are doubts about whether the AT&T network will actually support the speed at which the iPhone3G S is programmed to run. And, one of the key features that will be supported across the globe (but not in the U.S. thanks to AT&T) is tethering – a feature many customers have looked forward to since the beginning.
During the preview of the new iPhone there were many app demos that didn’t go as planned, and actually completely flopped, but that doesn’t come anywhere close to turning the fan base away from their beloved brand. But now, thanks to AT&T, the supreme user experience has been interrupted. The question is, given today’s economy, how many current iPhone users will go for the upgrade and sustain the blows from AT&T? I know at least one who is determined to keep up with the Jones’, but how many more will do the same? Unlike AT&T, Apple’s user experience has only improved over the past few years. Let’s see how many users overlook the grey cloud of AT&T to continue their journey with new products from Apple.
- Mimi Knowles
pssst! Limina has embarked on developing our own iPhone app – “Top Secret” for now – but be on the lookout for the official announcement!