Designing for Humans

IDEA Winners in Design Resarch

2008 was a landmark year for the design research category of the International Design Excellence Awards, with a research project winning "best in show".   

SizeChina, the ergonomic data research project focusing on Asian populations won a Gold for the research category and is sharing best in show honors with the Apple iPhone.  SizeChina "assembled data from a representative cross section of people from mainland China to create the first-ever digital database of Chinese head and face shapes. Now, designers hoping to reach the two billion people in the Southeast Asian market will be able to create products that genuinely fit the needs of this audience."

I covered SizeChina last year after attending Roger Ball's presentation at the 2007 IDSA conference.

Coincidentally, the Silver winner (pictured) in the research category also has a Chinese connection - How the torch of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games came into being.  According to the site "this project's approach infused a sleek and modern design with symbols of both Chinese culture and the spirit of the Olympic Games", although it's not apparent what research was done to support this.

Bronze award winners included three medical-related projects, a field where user research is typically a critical component.  This year, the IDEA site not only lists the award winners, but all of the finalists, which range from color trends to condom dispensing projects.

You can also read more coverage of the awards at Businessweek, and learn about my experience as an IDEA juror this year (although not in the Research category).

Wall Street Journal Special Section on Product Design

I'm a few weeks late in reporting on this, but the WSJ had a very relevant section in the Monday, June 23rd edition, that you can access online.   Form and Function contains a series of case studies on recent product designs, ranging from golf clubs, to blue jeans, to power tools and even a Buick.

What each of these min-articles has in common is a focus on the role of user research, human factors and usability in the success (and sometime failures) of products. 

One of the more interesting examples discusses the MK Diamond portable masonry saw (pictured here).  It's a clear demonstration of what happens when you don't design for your users appropriately, and then learn from your mistakes.  And while I could argue the finer points of the described design research (e.g. risks of relying on focus groups for identifying requirements, using product designers as representative users, etc.), let's be happy with this sort of message getting across to a mainstream audience:

"The completed product, released in 2003, was an immediate hit, selling 3,120 units in its first year. But through customer feedback, the company began learning about design flaws in the BX3.

For example, the design assumed that most masons would operate the pull-down handle that brings the saw into cutting position with their right hand. It turns out, though, that masons typically grip the material they're cutting with their right hand and pull the handle with their left. That made the handle somewhat awkward for many users.

The company also realized there had been a critical flaw in its design process: It had conducted focus groups with contractors and suppliers who would buy the saw, but not the masons who would actually use it."

"After four years, MK Diamond decided to redesign the saw, and invited masons to its focus groups...designers became familiar with the BX3 by mimicking its everyday use -- carrying it around, transporting it in a pickup truck and cutting cement blocks. All that was videotaped and photographed, and the designers examined the images to help them find ways to make the saw easier to use.

One conclusion was that the saw folded in a way that required a mason to extend his arm outward while carrying it, causing shoulder strain. Tweaking the design, so the user could hold the folded saw closer to his leg, would make it seem lighter and reduce the strain"

BMW Redesigns i-Drive

In recent years the BMW i-Drive system has become the poster child for bad usability in interfaces (e.g. Don Norman's criticisms) - a conveniently-named foil to the positive user experience of the iPod.  But CNET now reports that a new version of the i-Drive (pictured) is in the works.  As a past user of the i-Drive, the new design seems to be addressing some of the key problems I experienced, with dedicated buttons for accessing each of the primary modes, and a single-axis rotary control apparently replacing key functions that previously relied on a multi-directional joystick.

Video - An Ethnography and Interviewing Primer

A couple of IIT graduate students (Gabriel Biller & Kristy Scovel) have put together an entertaining video primer on field interview techniques.  You'll appreciate it if you've ever done street intercept interviews.  The video runs about 30 minutes.  I think this pairs well with Sam Ladner's (non-video) design research primer. 

Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer

5 Guidelines for Ergonomic Observation

In my work in medical product ergonomics (as well as other areas of product design), I frequently encounter product teams who are applying field observation in their product development processes.  This is great, but much of the time, the teams lack the skills for conducting effective observations.  Actually, not so much the lack of skills, but a lack of structure to guide what to observe and how to document observations.  This lack of structure typically results in two types of patterns of observation notes:

1. Write everything - In this case observers write down every event in an ultimately futile effort to document the entire task flow, procedure, etc. This is the professional version of those students from high school who write down everything the teacher writes, even if they don't know what it means. I always loved it when the teacher would write something on the blackboard and then quickly erase it, leaving these human Xerox machines bewildered.
2. Write what's interesting- The more common approach is to document events or ideas that are out of the ordinary or unusual as they contribute above and beyond the observer's current knowledge base. This is certainly a more manageable approach, but is highly variable due individual observer's thresholds for what is "interesting".

How do you overcome these note-taking habits?  When I provide training on "Minimally Invasive User Research", I emphasize a team-based approach where multiple observers take on distinct, but overlapping roles.  For example, one observer may track high-level task flows while another focuses on the detail interactions between a user and a medical instrument.  But even when attention is focused to a particular set of user interactions, one can fall back in the write everything/write what's interesting habit.

An effective way to break away from those observational note-taking traps is to use guidelines.  Guidelines fall between having no structure and an overly-constrained template, by giving a set of elements to pay attention to, but the flexibility to document them as the observer sees fit. 

For example, in the case of observing a medical instrument interaction, I created the guideline of FoRCePS.  Forceps are a common medical instrument, making the term a memorable acronym for medical product designers.  The acronym represents five ergonomic areas to consider during observations, and is a loosely-based expansion of Stephen Pheasant's cardinal rules of anthropometrics.   The guidelines are:

• Feedback - Identify where the user's access to sensory feedback (e.g. visual, tactile) is compromised
• Reach - Identify situations where the user's major limbs (arms, legs) and minor limbs (fingers) must over-extend in order to carry-out a task
• Clearance - Identify situations where the user's major limbs (arms, legs) and minor limbs (fingers) must function within a limited space, such as finger holes or a handle
• Posture - Identify situations where the user's overall body posture is deviated from neutral position, as well as deviations at key joints (e.g. shoulder, wrist)
• Strength - Identify situations where the user must apply excessive or prolonged force for movement or stability, relative to their strength capabilities

Observers are encouraged to consider each of these guidelines individually for both macro and mico ergonomic issues, but also to understand how they interact with each other. For example, if there is limited visual access, compromising feedback, then a user may change his or her body and limb postures to accommodatean improved field-of-view, but in doing so, increase the extent of reach and reduce the effective  transfer strength.  I recommend watching a brief segment of a medical procedure (or other task where ergonomic compromises are common) to practice paying attention to these 5 issues.

So even with a set of five key principles, there's a lot to pay attention to during live observations and in follow-up video review.  Fortunately, FoRCePS and similar mental "tools" give an observer guidance and provide a consistent way to track issues that can be shared with other observers who are focusing on different aspects of the observed task.

Design Research and Sustainable Design

Mark Vanderbeeken (Core77) reports on the Changing the Change conference, which focused "on the role and potential of design research in the transition towards sustainability".  Design research can mean a lot of things, and in fact there were 138 papers presented on related topics.  Speakers included arch-IDEOer Bill Moggridge, who provided an "explanation of the three types of design research: generative, evaluative (or formative) and predictive, and his description of the Designers Accord, which is a powerful sustainability initiative spearheaded by some people within IDEO."

Certification in Human Factors & Ergonomics

I recently earned my credentials as a Certified Professional Ergonomist (CPE), and in the process learned that there's some lack of awareness and/or confusion regarding the certification options in the field of human factors and usability.

The CPE program is run by the independent Board of Certification in Professional Ergonomics.  The certification covers a broad and deep range of topics including ergonomics, anthropometrics, interface design and human factors principles.  Some companies and organizations have utilized CPE expertise to evidence the effective research behind the design of their products.  For example, Microsoft advertises the role of certified professional ergonomists right on the packaging of the Microsoft Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000.

Without getting into a lot of detail, there are multiple levels of certification depending upon work and academic experience.  Feel free to contact me if you're interested in finding out more about it.

To take a step back, the term professional certification refers to  "a designation earned by a person to assure that he/she is qualified to perform a job or task" and "generally, need to be renewed periodically, or may be valid for a specific period of time (e.g. the life-time of the product upon which the individual is certified). As a part of a complete renewal of an individual's certification, it is common for the individual to show evidence of continual learning."   Common professional certifications include accounting and nursing.

Many people in the usability field (particularly as it relates to Web and software user interface design) may be familiar with the Certified Usability Analyst (CUA) program developed by Human Factors International (HFI).  Note that HFI is a company, not a professional organization, so the CUA certification is specific to HFI's practices and methods, rather than those agreed upon by an independent body (although HFI is considered an industry standard-bearer). 

Moreover, the CUA is a relatively focused, short-term certification process "aimed at designers and developers who want solid training for practical work in user-centered design."  In fact, HFI distinguishes between their program, referring to CUAs as "the certified paramedics of the field", in contrast with CPE credential's:  "The CPE/CHFP program is aimed at full time usability engineering professionals. These people must have advanced degrees and at least four years of professional experience in the field. They are the certified physicians of the field."

Alternative Digital Pens

While I've given a lot of recent attention to the Livescribe Pulse pen (in fact using it for recording during a usability test this week), I wanted to bring attention to a couple of other options.  But comparing Iogear's Mobile Digital Scribeor Dane-Elec's ZPen to the Pulse isn't really apples to apples.  While all three devices can digitally record your handwriting, only the Pulse synchs your notes with recorded audio.  This critical feature makes it extremely valuable for documenting and reviewing information.  On the other hand, the Pulse requires the use of special paper for tracking purposes.  So if you're just looking for a way to digitize and translate your handwriting to text, (albeit, poorly) these pens may be useful to you.

The New York Times' David Pogue has a written review (plus requisite cheesy video)  for the Mobile Digital Scribe and ZPen that can give you more information since I haven't had first-hand experience with either of those two devices.