Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Beyond UX
Design or development? Destiny or death?
In most people's vocabularies,
means veneer. But to me, nothing could be further from the meaning of .
is the fundamental of a human-made creation that ends up expressing itself in successive outer layers of the product.
- Steve Jobs
I knew what UX means to me.
And I'm sure you know what UX means to you.
But what is *it* really???
Complements the Elements of User Experience.
Reminds us to consider the pragmatic, objective, architectural components from Strategy to Scope
Enforces the core of UX is value
Some have also gone further in recognition of the psychological influencers by including hedonistic factors to make sure we remember that people must *feel* something when they use the products we design.
Anyone who has done industrial design or social psychology will recognise these.
Love your products*
UX Honeycomb Model
Elements of User-Experience
- Hassenzahl's "Model of User Experience"
An eco-system approach
A multidisciplinary approach
"I want to be an Astronaut"
* Just don't *love* your products
Looking to the past for an answer
UX in 1991
UX within the design
How do we give our products a
that yearns to be
What is UX?
What does this guy mean by UX?
experience as design?
experience as good technology?
The Solution Lead
Back to my roots
The site to be like the NASA site
People to get as emotional about his site as they would about NASA's site
What is the environment like?
What are the users' needs
What's the technology platform
System base behaviour
Structure of content
Blueprints for functions' placement
(... is there more to this?)
Recipes for UX
Photoshop is still my design canvas for visual experience
Relying on the
wasn't enough to discuss UX with the Solution Lead & the Client
pragmatic, functional components
The client couldn't have the
user experience he wanted 'designed'
No mechanism to influence knowledge of the site in users' networks
No "desire" in the content
No motivation for conversion
No positive emotional outcomes to relate to networks
All hygeine factors:
Keep me safe
Keep industry in check
UX as a smoke screen for Solution Lead:
No concrete vision
No understanding of the context of use
No concrete way to realise ideas
Concepts too high-level to engage others
No holistic view > design + build
+61 404 00 66 95
I saw that the UX required:
design + development > UX blueprint, not *the* UX
UX really means
design + dev
Because UX is:
Personal + subjective
We can only take account of the variables:
Truly awesome UX:
Comes from building a soul
How people use the soul?
How people experience the soul?
... that's up to them
How to build a UX soul?
The soul's ingredients
what we can architect
the rest of the user-experience is what the user brings
I needed a recipe for UX
Different context. Different UX?
Same locale. Different UX?
by Jesse James Garrett
Its good UX recipe for:
Elements of design - service, product or technology development
Wasn't going to tell me how to make a great User Experience, or whether to focus on design or development components as the key enablers for UX
by Peter Morville
in a specific context
We can only design so much to create an experience
Users do their part as well
Creating frameworks for users to bring their context
Putting science back into our design & development to provide an objective value proposition
Doing "Big D" design
The consequence of this shift in thinking?
More psych in my design please!
"Big D" design isn't a monster to control
Its not "design by committee"
UR_UX_32.00. Limited Choice (Persuasion) – Simplicity of the visual aesthetic is required of the surface design to reduce the cognitive load on users and reduce the apparent number of choices available so that they are more likely to make a choice of what elements to interact with.
UR_UX_IA_34.00. Uniform Connectedness (Attention/Comprehension) – Specific elements are connected by uniform visual properties so that they are perceived by users as being more related than elements that are not connected. This requirement assists in providing inferred context.
UR_UX_IA_35.00. Chunking (Memory/Comprehension) – Elements in the wireframes have been grouped into familiar, manageable units so that they are more easily understood and easier to interact with. This requirement assists in providing inferred context.
UR_UX_IA_36.00. Proximity (Attention/Comprehension) – Various elements within the wireframes are closer to one another so that they are perceived to be more related than other items on the page. This requirement assists in providing inferred context.
You can get these from: www.getmentalnotes.com
These perspectives reinforce that:
A user’s experience isn’t just about content
or visual design
or a subjective experience based solely on 'usefulness' or 'desire'
Building souls into products is a about integrating reinforcing loops into our own processes that goes beyond just creating a desire to use a product or service.
It's outcomes predict whether someone is likely to re-engage with your design again, or whether they will tell everyone in their social circles powered by Twitter, Google+ and Facebook, that it’s crap and not to bother.
It means, moreover, that unless you have a multi-disciplinary perspective in your Teams’ skill set (likely powered by Agile methods) you’re going to be unlikely to adequately produce the base requirements expected by modern users of their experience.
If you work with designers + developers, though (not one proceeding the other), you already have the recipe for archetecting awesome experiences for users to own.
It's about transendence
More than the sum of its parts
See also: The New New Product Development Game
- Harvard Business Review, 1986
Creating a soul?