在导航栏右侧加入了”yusen的推荐阅读“,也就是Link啦。继承懒人传统,就懒得给介绍了。(PS:同样由于懒,博客的Theme也就懒得汉化了……)
目前只放上了一些英文的来源。不是说没有好的中文来源,而是希望推广一些我觉得很好的国外UX信息源 - 中文的好文章瞬间就会被大家传阅,不是吗?
欢迎提供你喜欢的UX信息源。语言不限哦!
在导航栏右侧加入了”yusen的推荐阅读“,也就是Link啦。继承懒人传统,就懒得给介绍了。(PS:同样由于懒,博客的Theme也就懒得汉化了……)
目前只放上了一些英文的来源。不是说没有好的中文来源,而是希望推广一些我觉得很好的国外UX信息源 - 中文的好文章瞬间就会被大家传阅,不是吗?
欢迎提供你喜欢的UX信息源。语言不限哦!
我在上一门叫做“Global Entrepreneurial Marketing”的课。在课上我们需要为一个客户公司设计一个市场推广计划。我带领的小组选择了一个名为Unruled Design的刚刚成立的设计咨询公司。我们的目标是:没有蛀牙 如何向他们潜在的客户推销UX的思维和做事方式?
我在IXDA论坛上针对这个问题发了个thread,想听听大家都怎么说的。里面有一些回复我觉得非常好,特放在这里分享一下。同时也想听听各位懒人的读者的看法。
How do you pitch UCD process (or design thinking)?
Hi all, I am a graduate student at Stanford doing a course project for a design consultancy startup. We are trying to understand how to effectively promote the user centered design process (or the buzzword “design thinking” ) to potentially unaware clients.
During my internship at Google as a user experience researcher, I recall we used different methods to accomplish a similar goal, such as inviting engineers and PMs to the usability lab observation room, designing and promoting posters and brochures about user personas, and having sessions for engineers and users to have conversation face-to-face. Also we think that IDEO gave a nice example by their “deep dive” TV show.
So, we would be interested in hearing more examples, ideas, and stories from you. How do you tell people what you are doing everyday as UX designer/researcher? How do you convince engineers/PMs/stakeholders/clients that the user-centered design is the right way to go? They are very important to us as we are in our “observation and understanding” stage.
Thanks a lot for your time, and we hope to learn from your experience!
Best,
Yusen Dai
回复1:
Hi Kelvin:
Here are a few tips I have applied and learned:
Understand the project/product/users/product team etc - what problems is the product team trying to solve and learn how can you help. Start with their needs first and foremost.
Use terms people understand - if they want you to run a Focus Group (but you think its better to run a Usability Test or something else), call it a Focus Group and educate around it. Don’t spend energy up front trying to convince them that your method is better.
Start small and grow - start with a UX method that provides some real insights and then build around that. Sometimes it may not always be the perfect approach.
Use examples people understand - show products that have benefited from good research or improved design and why people love it. Speak to people’s emotions and make them passionate about why you can help.
Find allies - People in your organization/other product teams who can provide good stories about where user research or design or usability testing or has helped improve a product forward.
Avoid jargon - UCD and other like terms for people outside of our field sound scary and may be another thing they have to learn in addition to their own job. Just as Engineering terms “can” sound scary to us. Its less about convincing them that your way is better, rather showing how the stuff we do may be able to compliment their approach. Find a common language. Lead with what people understand.
Turn insights into actionable design improvements - again less about the focus on the academic and more about what you can do to help improve the product.
Also see -
Selling UX -
http://www.uxmatters.com/mt /archives /2008 /10 /selling -ux.php< /li>
Selling Usability in(to) Organizations -
http://www.slideshare.net/dszuc /selling -usability -in -organizations -presentation< /li>
Selling Usability -
http://www.amazon.com/Selling -Usability -Experience -Infiltration -Tactics /dp /1442103736
rgds, Dan
回复2:
As a general rule the best pitch is one designed for the person you are pitching to. If you’re pitching to a marketer, speak in marketing terms. If you are pitching an engineer, pitch in engineering terms. Extra work is required to do this and you do have to study their turf, but you really have no business telling them how they should do things differently if you don’t know anything about them, their goals, or their problems.
Most UX consultancies wear their pitches on their websites. Go tohttp://www.cooper.com,www.adaptivepath.com, www.uie.com,http://www.nngroup.com/, etc, and you’ll see their pitches plain as day. Frankly if a UX firm can’t express their pitch well on their own website something is wrong, isn’t it? (You can find examples of this btw : )
The biggest mistake I’ve seen UX folks make in pitches is not being specific in what they want. There is often a philosophical war they wish to wage - they want to show a VP/Engineer/Marketer that they are wrong about their view of the world, and that design is more important than they think, which is mostly a waste of time. If you are outnumbered and outgunned, do not fight philosophical battles out in the open because you will lose.
If you drop the philosophy war for awhile you can find easy ways to pitch UX without ever making people defensive. Instead of “UX process lifecycle model” say you have a way to make the development team more efficient, or a way to raise customer satisfaction. All progress on tough turf begins with friendly trojan horses. Use their language and framework and make arguments in terms of their goals. After you have some wins, then talk people up with your philosophy and language - they might actually be open to listening then.
So to be clear, I highly doubt I’d come running in the door with a UCD PROCESS banner trailing behind me. Or ever give a talk about “THE UCD MODEL”. It’s offensive to all the managers and engineers who likely believe they already have a UCD PROCESS in place, however ridiculously bad it is. They don’t know how ignorant they are and likely don’t like feeling ignorant, especially if your UCD Process is going to take away fun parts of their job they’d rather not part with (tip: know who will be threatened by your pitch, and why, before you make it). I wouldn’t say “design thinking” either - you’d be muddying water you need to cross.
Instead I’d look for the most leveraged thing I can do first - e.g. an area where easy moves have big payoffs. And that’s what my first pitch would be about. “How we can improve the Flooby Dooby widget customer satisfaction by 50% in two weeks”. If I did my homework, that would be as large a part of my pitch as I could comfortably make it.
In all cases always have clear, specifc, actionable things you are pitching for. If you want veto power on feature decisions, ask for it. If you want a seat at the table at requirements discussions, say so. Money? Budget? Fine. ask for a reasonable thing, not too big but not too small, then totally kick-ass at it - only after your asskicking performance is acknowledged should you come back to ask for the rest of your shopping list.
If you do kick ass, which if you’ve chosen wisely should be entirely possible, important people will ask you “How did you do this!? It kick-ass!” And then you can smile as you talk about UCD PROCESS diagrams, UX methodoliges, design thinking frameworks, rapid prototyping sessions, and whatever else your heart desires. They’ll eat it up, because they’ve already seen it work on their own turf.
Consulting situations have more wrinkles than the mostly in-house advice I offer above, but the spirt is often the right one in both kinds of pitches.
-Scott
Scott Berkun
www.scottberkun.com
回复3:
I agree with Dan’s points, esp. about using terms that people are familiar with and then educating colleagues around that.
There is a certain amount of theater that is required to get your colleagues to buy into UCD practices. You have to start with the assumption that they also believe that their methods are just as effective as you believe (and obviously know of course!) that UCD is. Also, remember because of these methodological differences, you are asking people to make big changes to the way they work and not everyone likes doing new things that feel unfamiliar.
My strategy has been to slowly and iteratively introduce UCD practices and then generally watch them take hold and prove their value. It requires a lot of patience (esp. when you watch people do and say things to users that you feel are counterproductive), but it also is easier than trying to force people to change their ways all at once.
整个thread的地址:
Wei向我提到Luxury software 的概念。非常有趣。
奢侈品,从经济学的定义上来说,是随着收入增长,需求不成比例地增大的物品,同必需品相对。从这个意义上来说,昂贵的软件当然可以是一种奢侈品。(前提当然是大家都用正版),好比在中国,要是谁个人出钱买一套Adobe Creative Suite,周围的人一定用怪异的眼神看着他,心想“这人真是有钱/奢侈啊!”
那么免费的软件是否能变成奢侈品呢?其实也是有可能的。我想起日常生活中,大家经常说:你怎么还在用XXX啊,太土了,来用XXX吧(同样功能)!这其实就是软件奢侈性的体现。最经典的例子在中国莫过于用MSN的看不上用QQ的……虽然功能上QQ比MSN强大很多条街。
最近twitter上在Buzz一个叫Blu的软件,该软件用WPF写成,效果华丽无比,不过吃系统资源也很大。颇有网友使用之后“忍痛割爱”,继续使用twhirl等比较“朴实”的客户端。从这一点上来说,Blu似乎有点奢侈品的意思在里面。
另一个例子我想说的就是twitter本身。twitter很酷,但是很多人知道它酷也不用,为什么?一个原因可能是,如果你没有一帮geek,喜欢尝鲜的好友(尤其在中国),那么用twitter基本上能够有效获得的信息量很有限(除非你乐于天天follow Google等大众名人)。因此,有效使用twitter,需要有一定的好友资源。这样twitter同其他一些平台,如qq相比,作为社交性的网络服务,我认为也具有了一定程度的奢侈性。
从以上两个例子,也许可以给出奢侈免费软件的一个概念,奢侈免费软件,需要用户具备一定的资源才能获得,或者加以充分合理使用。这些资源可能包括:
当然我们不能忽视品牌和设计带来的效应。虽然Windows下的itunes体验很糟糕,但是精美的界面设计和苹果的品牌也让其具有一点奢侈品的意味(我还真遇到过觉得自己用iTunes很好很高贵的)
既然有了奢侈性,那就决定了不是人人都能用上/享受上。是否有听到过类似这样的话呢:“Twitter是那些很喜欢internet的人用的,我用不上啊” “他们拿Facebook都是和国外朋友联系的,我没那么多国外朋友,就上校内好了”。因此。在设计软件的时候,考虑到软件的这些特性,将有助于更好地定位产品,创造话题,推广市场。当我看到有人因为申请美空被拒觉得很郁闷的时候,我想,嘿,这还真是一奢侈网站啊。
我现在在上一门叫做软件体验设计(Software Experience Design)的课。这门课是由Stanford d.school开的。
这个课一个牛逼的地方就在于Hasso Plattner,SAP的cofounder和chairman,从目前来看每节课都会过来和我们一起上课。当然,d.school就是这哥们冠名的(Hasso Plattner Institute of Design)。看到他每每都让我陷入沉思,什么时候中国这种超牛逼企业的高管也能这么重视用户体验呢?
今天我们照例围成一圈讲用户需求收集(Needfinding),我已经忘记是怎么开始的了,Hasso Plattner突然发飙鸟。“Usability Lab is bad.”他说。“It’s making users lab rats.”
是啊,不要说用户,当我在Google China的可用性实验室里面坐着的时候都觉得不舒服,一个硕大的单面镜,摄像头,录音设备,自己不熟悉的环境,不熟悉的电脑,等等。有次一个用户硬是不会输入中文了。
在可用性实验室里面,我们经常关掉其他程序,把我们想测试的软件最大化,把任务规定好流程。而实际上呢?用户可能同时有20个程序在运行,而我们的软件只是一个小窗口;用户可能用到一半,打开浏览器查个资料,接个电话,站起来伸个懒腰,喝口水,回条MSN信息,然后再继续之前的工作。没有人盯着我们,没有人记录我们的一举一动。
作为一个受过多年正规科研训练并且做了一大堆实验的研究僧,我却经常很不愿意相信“研究”和“实验”出来的结果。为什么?当你越了解这个过程,你往往越觉得什么统计显著啊很少有靠谱的,实验设计和引导对实验的结果,有着重要的影响。而且最关键的是,当用户被丢进实验室,他就不是自己了。想想科学家还能提高智力呢,何况是来到一个完全不一样的环境?
相对来说,我更加相信ethnography研究的结果。我相信只有深入到用户的环境(context)中进行观察和访谈,所得到的结果才更加有说服力。观察用户和周围环境的互动而不仅仅是目标软件本身,用户创造的物体(artifact study),用户出乎预料的行为和捷径(workaround),都对用户研究有着重要意义。
SAP的Executive VP今天在课上说:当你合上你的笔记本,准备跟用户结束这次访谈的时候,千万不要关掉你的录音器材,很多时候整个访谈中最重要的insight就是这时候用户一放松说出来的。就跟Big Bang Theory里面那印度哥们对着女人就说不出话来一样,很多人一听到访谈两个字,立马连说都不会话了,在脑子里拼命地自圆其说(sense making),怎么可能有真实的表现呢?
当然,饭要一口一口吃,在中国说可用性实验室有害无疑是不切合实际:那么多公司包括全球最大中文搜索引擎公司还没有呢……某种程度上,可用性实验室是UE在公司资源的一种体现,实验室研究结果,也是说服各种stakeholder的好武器,只是,大家都别太当真就好了,特别是所谓的统计显著……
moko:
My talk in Mozilla:
I listed four themes for the future web, they are:
1. Data. Open, linked data and Metadata.
- Semantic web
- Human computation
2. Self. Self representation.
- Personalization
- Self extension
3. World. A connected world.
- Tangible interaction
- Contextual awareness
4. Life. A digitalized life.
- Virtual reality
- Service web
I also raised about the topics of:
1. What is design?
2. Designer’s multiple roles
3. Where indeed does innovation come from?
4. Customizable user centered design process.
同理心(移情作用,empathy)是设计者挂在嘴边的一个词。大体上就是说人能够感受到别人的心理和情感,也就是我们说的感同身受。形成同理心一个技巧,是精确地告诉对方,我知道你现在是这样想的:blabla。
上个世纪六十年代,MIT的Joseph Weizenbaum做了个实验,他做了个电脑聊天软件叫做Eliza,然后赋予其一个心理医生的角色叫做Doctor。于是有了以下的对话:(大写的是机器人说的,小写的是被试说的)
Men are all alike.
IN WHAT WAY
They’re always bugging us about something or other.
CAN YOU THINK OF A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE
Well, my boyfriend made me come here.
YOUR BOYFRIEND MADE YOU COME HERE
He says I’m depressed much of the time.
I AM SORRY TO HEAR YOU ARE DEPRESSED
It’s true. I am unhappy.
DO YOU THINK COMING HERE WILL HELP YOU NOT TO BE UNHAPPY
I need some help, that much seems certain.
WHAT WOULD IT MEAN TO YOU IF YOU GOT SOME HELP
Perhaps I could learn to get along with my mother.
TELL ME MORE ABOUT YOUR FAMILY
My mother takes care of me.
WHO ELSE IN YOUR FAMILY TAKES CARE OF YOU
My father.
YOUR FATHER
You are like my father in some ways.
WHAT RESEMBLANCE DO YOU SEE
You are not very aggressive but I think you don’t want me to notice that.
WHAT MAKE YOU THINK I AM NOT VERY AGGRESSIVE
You don’t argue with me.
WHY DO YOU THINK I DON’T ARGUE WITH YOU
You are afraid of me.
DOES IT PLEASE YOU TO BELIEVE I AM AFRAID OF YOU
My father is afraid of everybody.
WHAT ELSE COMES TO MIND WHEN YOU THINK OF YOUR FATHER
Bullies.
DOES THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT YOUR BOYFRIEND MADE
YOU COME HERE
….
可见,仅仅简单重复对方说的话,就能让用户和一台从现在标准看非常傻逼的电脑产生很深刻的交流和情感互动。这一点,在界面设计中应该是可以得到应用的。
懒人有禅上曾经有过一次对“Three Waves of HCI”的讨论,猛击这里。
今天看到一篇07年的论文 The Three Paradigms of HCI,对“HCI的三波”有新的解读,文章娓娓道来,很有说服力。(直接复制粘贴了,懒人有禅嘛,哈利路亚)
1st Paradigm: Man-Machine coupling
The goal of work in this paradigm is to optimize the fit between humans and machines; the questions to be answered focus on identifying problems in coupling and developing pragmatic solutions to them.
2nd Paradigm: Mind-Computer symmetric, coupled info processor
It is oriented around the idea that human information processing is deeply analogous to computational signal processing. It put emphasis on a set of information processing phenomena or issues in computers and users such as ‘how does information get in’, ‘what transformations does it undergo’, ‘how does it go out again,’ ‘how can it be communicated efficiently’ etc.
3rd Paradigm: phenomenologically situated
其实吧,就是context sensitive
这段话说得很好:The 1st and 2nd paradigms acknowledge context primarily as “those non-technological factors that affect the use of the technology.” Under the 3rd paradigm, we ask not “how does context give our design meaning?” but instead “how does our design accommodate the context?” This latter question includes what we do not put into our design, our restraint, or “zensign.” It also encompasses the possibility that the technological system is reported not because it is particularly unique or attractive, but because of how it fits into the particulars of a complex situation. A consequence of this is that context is a central component not only to the problem (if any) but also to design and evaluation.
附表一张:

你知道这个标题说的啥意思吗?
无聊跑去旁听斯坦福本科Introduction to Social Psychology的课,虽然绝大部分东西已经是耳熟能详的常识了,但听到一个好玩的姓名字母效应(Name Letter Effect),查阅了一些相关的资料之后发现这又是一个听起来不可理喻的发现。当然,目前以下说的这些发现的信度和效度都有可以存疑的地方,仅供参考。
简单来说,就是在英语里面你的名字的首字母会影响你很多事情。请注意,这是一个hypothesis,而且以下的研究发现也是correlation,而不是causality。一定要分清楚正相关和因果关系哦。
我觉得很多这样的例子应该是可以用第三者效应解释的,即A到B的正相关实际上是一个与A和B都有因果关系的C引起的。不过,一项研究显示,让人们随机选出自己最喜欢的五个字母的时候,他们偏向于选择自己名字中有的字母呢。有人认为,姓名字母效应代表了人潜在的egotism和Narcissism(自大和自恋?)
照此推理,也许姓王的人更喜欢喝王老吉,姓康的人更喜欢吃康师傅方便面?不过有研究对食物类型,动物种类,娱乐活动等作了类似的研究,没有发现显著的姓名字母效应。
现在,你明白为什么为什么苏茜在海边卖贝壳了吧?(Why Susie sells seashells by the seashore)
参考文献:
Pelham, B.W., Mirenberg, M.C., & Jones, J.T. (2002). Why Susie sells seashells by the seashore: Implicit egotism and major life decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 469-487
Nuttin, J. M. (1985). Narcissism beyond gestalt and awareness: The name letter effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 353-361. (Described in Mixing Memory blog.)
Gallucci, M. (2003). I sell seashells by the seashore and my name is Jack: Comment on Pelham, Mirenberg, and Jones (2002). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 789-799.
Chandler, J., Griffin, T. M., & Sorensen, N. (2008). In the “I” of the storm: Shared initials increase disaster donations. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 404-410.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_letter_effect
回国正好赶上百度用户体验部主办的UXday活动,我们小组讨论的话题是tab(标签)在使用时的禁忌。
我们讨论的话题集中在一个点上:如何处理海量的tab?
首先回顾一下Tab的历史。这里的tab,是一类交互元素的统称,既包括在web设计中的导航,也包括在浏览器等桌面软件中的使用。被称为tab的交互元素一般有如下两个特性:
所以从广义来讲,绝大多数导航菜单其实都可以归结为tab。
在网页设计中tab的使用一般认为是Amazon开了先河。相信大家很多人都读过LukeW的经典回顾文章:The History of Amazon’s Tab Navigation(中文版请猛击这里)。从这篇文章中我们可以看到,Amazon的导航从最初只有两个tab:Book和Music,演化到2000年最多的时候有两排tab。很显然,当tab数量增多的时候,tab这种交互方式遇到了一些困难。

另一个例子是Word 2003中的设置对话框。如下图所示,当标签太多而显示空间有限的时候,微软不得不同样把标签排成两排。这样做的一个大问题是,上排的标签在选中的时候,如何表示选中状态和当前内容页的关系?

微软的做法是饱受诟病的。在上图中当用户点击上排标签时,上排自动和下排对调从而保持标签和内容页的紧贴关系。然而这个做法使得标签的位置非常不一致,相信很多人都有着同样的迷茫经历。
在其他一些软件中,如firefox 3(如下图),点击上排标签时,仅仅将标签显示变为选中状态,这样的好处是保持了标签位置的一致性,然而却失去了一些位置上的指示功能。

那么如果多排标签不是个好主意,如何处理很多的标签呢?
一个显然的思路是把标签从惯用的水平排列换到竖直排列。一般这样的排列是在视图的左侧,可能是以图标或者文字的形式。
不过这种做法存在一些问题。首先,如果标签的名字很长,将会占据很多宝贵的左侧空间,而这一空间正好是屏幕上用户注意焦点,兵家必争之地。有的网站的做法是将文字垂直摆放,这样的做法,特别对于英文网站来说,可读性简直就是灾难。如果放在右侧,有可能和滚动条相互干涉,并且用户也不容易注意到。其次,当标签不多的时候(考虑标签数目可变的情况),标签下方放什么内容也是比较头疼的。
一个思路是,如果标签之间存在着某种结构,那么可以把标签分组。然后增加一个导航级别。微软的onenote在这方面做到了登峰造极的程度,将信息分为Notebook, section, page三个层次,每个层次都用标签导航来表示,结果就是在页面的上方,左侧和右侧都布满了标签……微软功力不俗,用格式塔(左侧的分割)、色彩标记(section的彩色和page的白色)等手法把三层标签导航都处理得很好。

另一种分组的方式是直接呈现在标签上。考虑windows任务栏的默认分组方法,将同一个程序的不同窗口归为一组。或者是IE8中,将来源于同一父网站的标签用相同的颜色归为一组。

如果标签之间存在重要程度的不同,也可以考虑显示最重要的一批标签,同时以“更多”等按钮来提供余下的标签(交互设计模式中的extra on demand模式)。如Amazon在实在不能忍受双排标签之后就这样做了(如下图)。此外,还可以根据用户目前的位置提供相关性最高的标签。

如果标签之间不存在重要程度的区别,也不存在显然的结构呢?比如浏览器的标签?不同的浏览器有不同的做法。firefox和IE的默认做法是只显示一行标签,设定标签的最短长度,然后在两端加入向左/向右的箭头,同时还在标签栏左侧或者右侧加入显示全部标签按钮。Safari 4只在最右侧加入一个”…”的“显示全部标签”按钮。而Chrome做的比较奇怪,没有最短标签长度这一设置,也不管三七二十一将所有标签都显示在一行里面,于是当标签数目过多时就会变成如下图这个悲剧的样子。我们建议,如果只显示一行标签的时候,best practice是:在左右两侧显示滚动的箭头,并且提供以某种方式(通常是平铺或下拉菜单)显示全部标签列表的按钮,并且设定标签最短的长度。

总结浏览器的做法,可以看出还是以对标签栏的横向操作为主。举个手持设备的例子。facebook的iPhone App中,对于不同的feed是将其显示在一个“window”中,手指滑动可以拖动feed条在window下移动(语言很难描述清楚,看图)。另一个对标签条横向操作例子是苹果的Mac页面,在这里苹果使用了交互设计模式中的“注释滚动条”模式,将滚动条加上了标签的功能,这同时也是标签分组的使用。


总结以上讨论:
1. 在静态页面设计中,尽量避免使用多排水平标签的布置。可以使用垂直标签代替。
2. 如果标签之间存在结构,可以将标签分组。分组可以以下拉菜单,颜色分组等多种方式进行。
3. 如果标签重要性或相关性存在区别,可以显示最重要的标签,然后加入“更多”(全部)按钮。
4. 如果标签之间都是相互平等的,可以考虑对标签栏进行操作,如加入左右移动按钮,允许用户拖动/滑动等。
最近评论