Blog

5 things you shouldn’t do when dealing with UX – decisions that make a meaningful UX strategy impossible

Clemens Lutsch
Clemens Lutsch
June 30th, 2020

 

Warning UX - Don't try this at homeNowadays it’s obvious for a company to approach the topic of user experience and try to take advantage of the human-centred design into their own organization as part of a UX strategy. However, the nature of the topic “UX”, which combines technical as well as design and analytical domains through a new approach, quite often creates organizational heartburn… because management often does not really know where exactly such expertise is located. And even if you have found a home for UX in the organization… how to deal with it?

The first part of the article is about 5 things that you shouldn’t do if you want to successfully introduce UX in the company. Each of these 5 things is based on real situations found in real teams and real companies. A possible resemblance to known situations or recognition cannot therefore be ruled out ?.

 

#1 – The knowledge-free decision maker

Decision makers decide. This is obvious, because sometimes things simply have to be decided. However, it would be desirable that a decision maker also knows the things he has to decide on. Unfortunately, there are always situations where this knowledge is incomplete or even missing. In the field of UX, the last is often the rule. We know the manager who became a manager as a result of an assessment center, but who is absolutely unqualified in the field that he is managing. We know the manager who makes a decision for the sake of making a decision and not based on professional knowledge. We know managers who make decisions to consolidate positions of power and not to serve the project. At UX the visibility of these decisions is a double-edged sword. The impact on the perceived quality of the products and the brand is as relevant as the impact and significance for the development and innovation of the systems themselves. However, if the decision maker lacks the knowledge of the criteria of good human-centred design, a decision is left to personal opinion alone and is therefore unfortunately not qualified. This is similar to an architect saying that this load-bearing wall could be removed after all, because the ceiling would somehow hold anyway. When you hear something like that you should not have a good feeling. Unfortunately, however, such meaningless sayings are heard again and again when it comes to UX. But then they say, “Variant A is supposedly simpler, but I like B better” or “Well, I think the button is visible… I don’t know what kind of problem the users have…” or “Personally, I think this is too complex…”.

So, if you want to fail with UX in the company, make sure that decision-makers are not equipped with knowledge of UX. Let managers act from assessment centers, let their personal opinion override sound knowledge and you will have very interesting times.

 

#2- Sustainable avoidance of clear responsibility

When it comes to UX issues, everyone wants to have a say. Everyone has an opinion, because “one is also a user…”. This saying (and why it is exactly the reason why those involved in the project cannot always have a say in everything) will be covered in the 2nd part of this blog post. UX shares the same fate as communication design. Unfortunately, the everyday experience leads to everyone feeling called and empowered to contribute a personal experience in professional discussions. And so, when working in projects, too often, professionally sound knowledge and established methods compete with personal opinions, which may be vehemently expressed. Since it is almost impossible to resolve this confusion in an orderly manner, an organization drags this very confusion through a project in a unfortunately highly inefficient and therefore cost-intensive way – to the bitter end. Decisions are watered down, meetings inflated, ambiguities are avoided, solutions delayed, blurriness is created and a team often works against established knowledge and required qualities. ISO 9241-210 (Human-centred Design) requires that there should be clear accountability for the activities in the human-centered design of systems.

UX without a manager with a management-backed mandate paves the way for any, expensive, unsustainable, and resource-intensive actionism. It is safe to assume that the UX roles spend a good part of their working time justifying themselves and their work, as well as their results, in front of others.

 

#3 – Say “User Experience”, but you are just thinking “just make it nice”

User Experience is a holistic topic. This means that work on UX starts very early, in initial project ideas and continues throughout the entire life cycle of a system. Nothing is dumber than equating UX with “aesthetics”. It is about the perceived quality of a system and the expectations of the user. A system that has been developed without the needs of the user cannot be salvaged through cosmetics. And it is obvious that polishing details here and there is naive because it is inefficient.

This disregard for the topic UX is often expressed in job advertisements. They are looking for a “UX Manager”, who is supposed to “bring his ideas into a dynamic team” (= concept/strategy), doing research (= empiricist and user researcher), visualize ideas in prototyping tools (= interaction designer) and of course can convince visually (= interface designer). In addition, that candidate should be familiar with common technologies like HTML, CSS and JavaScript. The fact that we are talking about completely different qualifications is a learning process that takes time for many companies.

The topic of user experience has grown in its various forms over decades. It has been encompassed in various national and international standards and demands a deep, well-founded knowledge from specialists. This cannot be acquired by reading 2 articles or certified after a 2-day training.

The best way to frustrate UX professionals in your company and to deny your company the added value of a holistic UX strategy is to treat UX like a smiley sticker that you stick on something that is no laughing matter.

 

#4 – Steer clear of evidence-based decisions

During an initial interview, my contact told me about a far-reaching decision regarding an UI Design Framework. After a long discussion and evaluation of a survey, the decision was made to take the framework “HoweverYouNameIt”. I frowned (on the one hand this makes a serious impression and on the other hand I had flinched at the word “survey”) and wanted to know more precisely what kind of survey they referred to. My information needs were satisfied by the technical project manager assured me that the survey among the developers was clearly in favor of the UI Design Framework “HoweverYouNameIt”, because that is the one that best fits the chosen IT strategy and is also ideal for the users. So, now I was sitting there… and had to inform the poor people that their “survey” unfortunately was void… they had found their solution, but unfortunately, they did not yet know the problem.

This example shows that when we are dealing with UX, very often decisions are based on incorrect, missing or insufficiently questioned information. This pattern also includes decisions that follow the opinion which was given with most vehemence… according to the motto: “Whoever is loud is right!”. This is, of course, complete nonsense, because only those who can prove theirs position by means of objective, comprehensible arguments are in the running for decision-making. If this information, this ‘evidence’ is not available to all parties, it must be clear to all involved that any decision is an assumption. This assumption might be refuted by objective evidence… or established as a fact.

A lot of basic knowledge about UX and UI design is documented in the standards and expertise of the profession. We are in the fortunate position to work with this information and thus create added value in projects… both in terms of content and organisation (in which, for example, we do not have to discuss things that have long been documented and specified elsewhere).

However, if you prefer to play russian roulette and want to align decision-making according to the volume of the lecturer, if you prefer not to choose your path based on a map and compass, please do not talk to experts… because facts might irritate you.

 

#5 – Thinking only in costs instead of effects

A common misconception in the industry is that one would have to invest in UX. But a user’s experience with a product, system or service always happens. So, the vendor has no choice… he has already created a user experience. Resources have been spent, decisions have been made about UX. If a company has a low level of UX maturity (i.e. does not conform to human-centred design standards to a large extent), then this relevant work has been done by non-specialist personnel, by uninformed decision-makers, or by people who have done it “on the side”. Thus, the existing investment in UX is hidden in the “anyhow” costs… and nobody really knows how big this investment actually is… not to mention that the consequences of bad UX and bad usability are hardly foreseeable in the implemented solution.

Let a calculation example illustrate this. A visit to a software forge in the north of Germany was about the realignment of the existing solution. The most pressing problem was the inconsistency in the interaction design… at least in the view of the supplier. In my opinion, the most urgent problem was that everything in the user interface did not fit together. I wanted to know who is implementing the UI and user guidance in the current version. I was introduced to 3 developers present. Let’s say these developers get €60,000 per year. According to their own statement, the UI topic takes up about a third of their working time. 3 developers invest 20,000 € per year for UX / UI. This makes €60,000 a year of direct investment in UX… but executed by non-specialist staff. In addition, there are services from marketing, management and some other developers. The customer admitted to spending a sum of about €90,000 – €120,000 per year over “anyhow” costs. These funds can be used much more effectively with professionally qualified specialists… not to mention the capacity released for employees who have done UI work “on the side” as part of their working hours (which, in addition, has also limited their productivity in the area for which they were actually qualified).

Of course, these employees were briefly irritated that “they were deprived of a responsibility” (which they should never have had in the first place), but then became quite happy to be able to do their job again without this “UI stuff”. With the right personnel, the company was able to create a modern and usable solution in the shortest possible time with fewer resources and increased efficiency.

But if you prefer to have UX in the company conducted by people who have no qualification for it, just keep listening to the voices that steadily talk about how expensive it all is… and not to those who talk about the benefits!

If you would like to learn more information about UX in an organization, the strategic possibilities of UX and about UX & Digitization or just want to get in touch with Clemens Lutsch, our Head of UX Strategy, you can find more information here: https://www.centigrade.de/de/leistungen/ux-strategy

UX Strategy

 

UX Analysis Based on Usage Data – How Big Data helps to optimize the usability of applications

Analytics Graphs

Big Data is considered the trend topic of digitization. Some even claim that data is the new gold. But usage data is a treasure trove that has seldom been used to analyse usability with quantitative methods. What possibilities are there for measurably improving UX with usage data and supporting product owners in their decisions?  Get a first overview of the analysis of usage data in my blog article.

 

read more…

Challenges of classical usability test methods and how we solve them

Nora Wolfsheim

Usability Test Szenario

Introduction

One, in my opinion positive trend is that companies increasingly want to involve their potential users in the development. This can happen in many different ways: The spectrum ranges from market research interviews to data analysis of websites and various usability test methods. Testing is particularly important in order to obtain more intensive and detailed information about the problems and, above all, the user needs. However, especially with usability tests it can often be observed that they are only used when prototypes are already very mature. These are then often heavyweight tests in which everything is to be checked with as many participants as possible. The late timing of the tests leads to the fact that resulting adaptations involve high development efforts, since the majority of the application has already been implemented. Changes to concepts, on the other hand, are less complex. Especially in pure screen-based testing, where the user needs are left out, it can happen that the development has to be started almost from scratch. A complete misalignment of the application with the right user-needs should not occur at all. Companies are therefore faced with a whole range of challenges if the user is not to be left out in UX.

In this article, I would like to show how we solve these challenges and involve potential users early on in the project using various test methods, in order to create a basis for further development.

read more…

UX & Game Thinking: Game Changer for the Car Industry?

Roman Rackwitz

Podcast "Der Flaneur Digital Business People" VisualOn December, 12th 2018, I listened to an interview with Dr. Carsten Breitfeld, a world-renowned expert in electric mobility, and the co-founder & CEO of the company BYTON which aims at turning the car into a next-generation smart device. He was a guest at the ‘Der Flaneur’ Podcast (German only), live from the Websummit conference 2018 in Lisbon.

Breitfeld spent the past 20 years at BMW, leading a range of key engineering divisions within chassis development, powertrain development and corporate strategy. Before joining BYTON, Dr. Carsten Breitfeld was Vice President and Head of Vehicle Program i8 of BMW Group.

Listening to the podcast (unfortunately available only in German) you can see his vision of cars becoming basically smart devices on wheels, platforms for services and more. Because as cars become more and more autonomous, people sitting inside of these cars want to be entertained and engaged. This is also where BYTON wants to earn its bigger share of revenue: with services instead of car sales.

Ex BMW Entwickler des Byton startup

Dr. Carsten Breitfeld

 

 

 

“As cars become smarter and autonomous we need a new kind of user experience. Because the question is what are people doing inside the car while they are commuting.”

read more…

Designers who code: A Story about Hybrids

Günter Pellner
Günter Pellner
October 28th, 2019

Programmieren und Phtoshop

Especially in the UX industry, new fields of expertise often arise. Fields in which employees with different skills are necessary and can play to their strengths as an interface to other fields. We are talking about “hybrids”, people who can do two or possibly even several things or are at least interested in several. Designers who can program, authors who can design, analysts who can program.

read more…

Game fun for all – What Game Accessibility is all about

Computer games are designed to spread fun and entertainment and motivate players to play long term. So it makes sense to use these added values not only in the entertainment industry, but also in other areas, for example in therapy or rehabilitation (see our blog article Little big heroes – supporting children’s patients in therapy with virtual reality). Games have great motivational potential, which could be used particularly well there. But not all people with motor or cognitive impairments can participate in this experience if the so-called “Game Accessibility” is too low. Let me illustrate this with an example.

read more…

UX Design – Return on Invest (ROI)

Miriam Julius
Miriam Julius
August 13th, 2019

User Experience means that users experience a product. The most innovative controls and the most fluid animations are useless if the product is not sold and used. As a UX service provider, we have seen many times how good UX not only makes the product a success for users, but also how UX helps a product get to market in the first place. The Return on Invest (ROI) of UX-Design shows the profit or turnover achieved as a result of an investment in UX Design. Where the additional profit / revenue comes from, which other aspects contribute to the ROI and further questions about Return on Invest by UX-Design are answered in this article.

UX Design Return on Invest

read more…

Digitization and User Experience – Why Smart Manufacturing redefines who is how talking with whom.

Clemens Lutsch
Clemens Lutsch
July 18th, 2019

Industrie 4.0

First of all: Industry 4.0 has a lot to do with technology, computers, software, machines, the Internet and intelligent data analysis. These relationships are not unknown, but have been decisive in the industry over the last 30-40 years. We remember how the computer (often a 286 AT) pushed the mechanical typewriter out of the office step by step… and with it everything that belonged to that machine at that time, from Tipp-Ex (with the special smell of solvents) to carbon paper and ink ribbons. The first modems followed suit, which “audibly” connected the office with the Internet and data services. And shortly thereafter, discussions started as to whether and who really needed a color monitor: “Honestly? A color monitor? What’s that good for?”

So changes in the way we work / with what we work are not unknown to us – we tend to forget how much the user’s experience with an interactive system has changed.

read more…

Little big heroes – supporting children’s patients in therapy with virtual reality

Reach small and large goals easily and playfully, without being aware of the effort involved. This is a vision that drives researchers and practitioners in various fields of application around the topic of gamification. In this article, I describe how we apply gamification in practice in the Mighty U research project to help children with motor disabilities with therapy.

In the last few years, gamification has increasingly developed into a topic with a strong media presence in the German-speaking world, with which numerous TV reports, newspaper articles and conferences have also been in touch. But Gamification not only received a positive response in the media. We at Centigrade also receive more and more request in the gamification and enterprise gaming area, of which some have already been implemented.

read more…

Is Microsoft’s ’s Fluent Design System paving the way to a brighter future for designers?

Nathalie Mini
Nathalie Mini
April 30th, 2019

If we are honest, we all are desperately awaiting the future. We are waiting for the next boom, which seems so close but actually didn’t come much closer for the last 5 years. Microsoft’s Fluent Design is one of these developments that promise a brighter future. Will it be able to live up to the high expectations of the UI Designer communities? What can designers, what can developers take from it right now? I took a look at the Fluent Design System and explored it during my work on a first test project. In this article, I’ll share what I learned so far.


read more…

“Project Scoping” or how to start projects RIGHT

Project Scoping Workshop

Prolog

Scenario 1 – The Swiss Army Knife

Monday morning, 08:30, a meeting room somewhere on the third floor of an office complex. At the table: several developers, project managers, marketing representatives, and two UX specialists. Their budget for the next three months is secured. The goal of the workshop is to define the first work packages of a long-term plan to revise their entire software and make it more user-friendly. During the workshop, it turns out that there are four work packages in total, with each attending project manager assuming that his or her package has priority. The result is a long dispute which ends in the decision to tackle all packages simultaneously. After burning through the first budgets, the big disappointment sets in – nothing has been finished, no noticable progress compared to the status quo has been achieved. The project is therefore stopped and postponed to an uncertain date.

Scenario 2 – The Top Secret Project

Tuesday afternoon, 14:30, the CEO’s office. In addition to three close confidants of the management, the head of the development team and two representatives of an external UX agency are present. They are planning to develop a new software in the next two years. The project team is confident that the software will be a resounding success, which is why the budget for the entire development has already been assured. The software is developed in-house and after two years, a creatively sophisticated software that has been extensively tested and approved by internal staff is launched. The potential customers did not know about the new development so far, because the management did not want anybody to know something about the innovative product before release.

One year later: The software has been available for 12 months, but only sold once – to a subsidiary. Two years of development have been in vain. The UX agency gets removed from the project, as it has apparently not provided an exciting enough experience for potential users.

Projects like those two exaggerated scenarios are common. A motivated start, a great team – but a frustrating result nobody can figure out. But why is that? What can be done to avoid such situations of frustration and, above all, money sinks?

read more…

Want to know more about our services, products or our UX process?
We are looking forward to hearing from you.

Employee Experience Manager
+49 681 959 3110

Before sending your request, please confirm that we may contact you by clicking in the checkbox above.