Is UX design killing product?
On tech social media and discussions, a huge brouhaha has erupted over UX design. Developers see a new breed of UX designers as pushing the line that ‘look and feel’ out guns ‘features and functionality’. Some have fled Microsoft and Google, as the culture of UX has overwhelmed teams, making progress sclerotic. The designers tend to rotate, the developers remain in post, so they get tired of eager young things turning up with uninformed personal views rather than worked our ideas. I’ve seen this myself and, on reflection, I think this is at least a worrying trend.
In some cases the developers who walked out report projects being taken over by an extremist faction, high on opinion but low on technical knowledge, requesting unfeasible interface features. Developers in Microsoft describe bright young things bringing in Macs, having never used a PC as a working tool, designing tool interfaces that were at best unsuitable, at worst, unusable.
I’ve seen similar things over many years, in many contexts.
The first in online learning, where almost all the discussion with the buyer is about look and feel, not functionality and usability or, more importantly, learning. The problem is often that the buyer doesn’t know anything about design (or at times learning) so makes off the cuff ‘can you make it look like …’ type requests. This is similar to giving video scripts to clients, SMEs or lawyers – where they can massacre the dialogue.
A second is the use of imagery that doesn’t really fit the product. A common example is AI product that has images of those toy 2D clipart robots, or little rocket ships. I’ve seen graphics of pens and ink nibs on generative AI product. When asked to justify the imagery there’s little real justification.
My pet hate is the predominance of cartoon imagery. It’s everywhere, so clearly not the result of matching style or substance to audience. I don’t watch cartoons, most adults don’t. Fine for primary schools but not adult learning. You get this when ‘Edtech’ people who tend see learning in terms of schools and kids, get roles in adult or workplace learning. The workplace is not an infants’ school. The worst are those figures with speech bubbles, where you click on each and the text appears, giving Ahmed. John and Sophie’s views on the subject at hand – really?
In truth the best interfaces for normal (not tool) use, are simple. It is put well by Papert:
Low floor means painfully obvious and simple to use. The two best examples are Google and ChatGPT – one letterbox, type something in and press enter – LOW FLOOR.
High ceiling means you get something great, even amazing, back. You get this with Google and ChatGPT – you don’t get it with a next button on pages of content or a speech bubble or flipping a card on the screen – HIGH CEILING.
Wide walls mean there’s breadth and substance in the response, you get a substantial reward that is what you want or even exceeds expectations – WIDE WALLS.
To be fair good design can also be stymied by developers, project managers, stakeholders and clients. It’s a set of skills. But the uniformity of output has made me suspicious of who holds those skills.
Another interesting dimension to all this, is the cultural one. The US doesn’t care that much for high end design, - they want cost-effective functionality. In the UK and Europe, design often comes first. Donald Norman wrote about this and it is true.
This war between two very different groups is common these days. Interfaces are no longer simple HTML affairs, they are tiled, involve dialogue, voice and AI. It is impossible to do UX if you do not have a deep understanding of the technology and cognitive expectations of the audience. If you tell me almost everyone, always wants cartoons, you’re fooling me and yourself.
A lot of online learning sucks. It’s like wearing a suit or coat that’s two sizes too small – all a bit cramped and makes you feel constricted and uncomfortable. The problem is design that ignores the research, ignores learning theory and above all, ignores the fact that many of us hate much of the over-designed stuff that passes for contemporary online learning. Here’s a selection of 20 things that drive me CRAZY when doing e-learning....
1. Learning objectives – don’t bore me with your trainer-speak up front. I’m bored already and we haven’t even started.
2. Long introductions – history of,…background to… here’s your tutor… No, give it to me straight, stop padding things out.
3. Cartoons – cartoon style imagery is for kids. I don’t watch cartoons on TV, so don’t give me them when I’m learning - they’re so damn condescending.
4. Perfect people – I know this is about management but I don’t need stock pictures of perfect people in perfect suits with perfect teeth and hair – believe me, real offices don’t look like that.
5. Text-graphic, text-graphic – Lord Privy Seal – picture of Lord, picture of toilet, picture of seal. Stop just selecting a lazy image for every noun in the text, page by page.
6. Too much text – I don’t want all of this legal stuff, detail, overlong stories. I’m never going to remember all of this, so cut it until it bleeds, then cut it again.
7. Text and audio at same time – stop – I can’t do both at the same time. Give me images with narration or text only – not narration and text at the same time – it makes my head hurt.
8. Over-engineered effects – too much distracting movement, effects, scrolling against fixed backgrounds and buzz makes my head spin – listen up - when I learn, less is more.
9. Long video sequences – OK you’ve hired a video guy and the academic wants to prattle on a bit but I’m bored after 5 minutes and learning precisely nothing. Keep it short. Less is more.
10. Tinny audio – you sound as though you’ve recorded this in a huge tin can. Get a proper mike and record in a proper environment.
11. Sound effects – you may think it’s fun but those beeps for correct answers and bongs for wrong answers are doing my head in!
12. Music – who told you that background music aids learning – it doesn’t - get rid of it.
13. Multiple choice questions that simply take a noun from the text and ask me to select it from a list. In real life I never select answers from lists.
14. Stupid options in multiple-choice questions – don’t do it, I’m not a dumb-ass, treat me like an adult.
15. Drag and drop - I drag it, damn I've dropped it... this is a real drag.
16. Click on... Click on Phil, Peter or Samantha, to see what they think about Data Protection.... cue speech bubble... Noooooooo... Or you can't click on until ALL the text has been read or slowly typed on to the screen
17. False buttons – don’t make me click on something that looks like it’s interactive when it’s not. That annoys the hell out of me.
18. Opaque icons – your graphic artist may think he/she is an ‘artist’ but I haven’t a clue what that icon means.
19. Gamification – I’m not one of Pavlov’s dogs, so don’t make me collect coins, chase rubies or do silly gamey things in order to learn – I’m not 12. (Note that I'm all for deep gamification.)
20. Learning styles – what are you talking about - they don’t exist. Let me repeat – they don’t exist.
21. Mindful – let’s stop and be mindful – no that’s a mindless fad and I have a mind that wants to learn– move on.
22. Chat – so you’ve got a chat box for ‘social’ learning, as you believe in social constructivism. Social participation is often a waste of my time...
23. Legibility - text layered on photographs, coloured text on coloured backgrounds, centred text, text across the entire screen... it's words, so make it readable.
24. Branding - learning is not marketing, so don't flood me with your logo on every screen.
25. Happy sheet - no, I'm not a clown and I don't want to be happy, I want to be informed.
Note that I'm not against all of these things, especially gamification and collaboration. I'm just against simplistic implementations that learners don't like. Note that this is all in my book 'Learning Experience Design'.
No comments:
Post a Comment