Usability, Schmoozability?
This post was written by Clifford Boobyer on Thursday, March 15th, 2007 at 6:16 pm and is filed under The dog speaks, Grey matters.
I was recently asked by .Net magazine to write an opinion article on a subject of my choice. Being true to myself, I chose something topical in our industry to duly receive a good dose of slagging off. The following is by no means my finite opinion on the subject, it’s just been written to get a rise (maybe, maybe not)…
Here be the start of the article:
I get the distinct feeling there is a rather large bandwagon rolling it’s way through town. The term ‘usability‘ seems to be the latest trend in what should be the default in a logical web creation process. How does it actually differ from good solid design practice? Many an environmental designer has designed an interior space without the need for a consultant. Why is online different?
Okay, so there was a dark age in web design when form overshadowed function and we as web ‘designers’ all deserved the collective beating we so rightly received. Yet, fast forward ten years, and designers are still being tarred with the same brush. We are seen as smelly pen practitioners, slaves to our design software and barbarians who wish to conquer the world with impossibly small body text and links that cower from the very presence of a mouse icon.
One only really needs to look at the history of the greater design profession to understand that ‘usability’ is one of the cornerstones of design best practice. Usability is, for the educated and experienced designer, our very first consideration - from the design of airport directional signage through to the creation of type that will happily print at five point on a railway timetable booklet.
So, perhaps what’s thrown the online industry into turmoil, is the fact that there are so many ‘web designers’ that have not been educated to the principals of sound design logic. The rules for industrial, graphic and environmental usability best practice have somehow been lost in translation in the disposable world of web. Maybe it was the low budget, disposable nature of early web creation that led us all astray and it’s really only now that because of cost and user liabilities, web owners are starting to get to grips with what good design really means.
I am not discounting the existence of professional companies out there that specialise in usability. They quite often bring other assets to the table, such as analytics, trend and behavioural technologies. They also are fully aware of the designer’s role in converting a cold visit to a warm prospect. We enjoy working relationships with these companies and it’s flattering to have someone rubberstamp the logic of your work. (Even if you knew it was correct beforehand.)
My real gripe is with the few consultants out there masquerading as know-it all-usability ‘experts’; Blindly regurgitating the hallowed scripts of Dr. Nielsen, preaching the end of the world as we know it and summarily condemning graphic design across the world web; full-stop, no exceptions. I think what they are discounting in their crusade is essential business practice, the human spirit and the fact that humans are sometimes just not logical.
Take MySpace.com for example. From an editor’s point of view, it’s probably the most frustrating, un-user-friendly entity on the web today. Usability logic says it just should not exist. It should be a large reversed-polarity magnet, immediately turning the user base away in droves. But it’s not; it’s one of the most dynamic sites in the world. You don’t have to like it but you have to admire those damn pesky kids. What MySpace has done really well is tapped into a human need.
We have to realise that not all needs online are as basic as the need for text-only, 5Kb information pages. In fact in this developed age of the web, I’d go far as to say that whilst you may be checking the box for usability on some of your sites, you may be un-checking the box for subconscious aesthetic satisfaction. These days, we are more likely to hear the client brief ‘Sure, make it usable. That’s a given ‘ But we want this site to engage and convert’ That is not an instruction for us to build an immense visual mind-trip of a flash site, merely the recognition that we are primarily designing for humans first and text-readers second.
Here’s to a harmonious future of web, where all factors are considered in the creation process, usability included. It has been the case in offline design for a few hundred years.
Here endith the article. So there.
netmag, usability, accessibility, web design, trend, nielsen, myspace
March 16th, 2007 at 9:22 am
A well-rounded article.
Your comments:
“One only really needs to look at the history of the greater design profession to understand that ‘usability’ is one of the cornerstones of design best practice. Usability is, for the educated and experienced designer, our very first consideration…”
give me some hope. We usability folk know that what you say is true of course, it is just unfortunate that along with those designers like yourself that are educated in usability, there are thousands that are not.
As far as “Blindly regurgitating the hallowed scripts of Dr. Nielsen”… well, I can assure you that this usability consultant won’t be caught doing that.
March 19th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Thanks Greg, I think I got off lightly there!
March 20th, 2007 at 3:41 am
I think there’s more and more recognition that we need a more holistic approach, and that design, usability, and even SEO are all tools that should work hand-in-hand to accomplish a goal. Still, while usability and design certainly overlap, and I agree that good designers think broadly about things like user interfaces, there’s an aspect of usability that is more than common sense. I’ve worn the design hat more than a few times, and it’s easy as designers and programmers to let our egos get the best of us regarding our own creations. Usability’s biggest contribution is in getting us to see our own creations through other people’s eyes and admit that we don’t always know everything.
March 27th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
It’s without a doubt a tricky one to argue.
I think when it comes to all forms of design, things are often ‘hit or miss’. You can design with the perfect blend of usability and aesthetics, but no one can predict human behaviour. Let’s call it an ‘x factor’ (for want of a better word) - there are some poor websites out there that do great and vice versa. That something that elevates an idea/design above its peers. I’ll let you know what it is when i figure it out!!
May 28th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Clifford - wonderful article and well balanced in it’s approach.
There still is a problem with designers in add agencies being mainly schooled in offline media. Designers are asked work on websites and print design. Although not impossible, I have often found that many agency designers have print-led thinking.
Even dedicated web designers can produce mastabatory work that is often impressive in the board room, but only serves to frustrate users.
As an Information Architect I have been told by a designer, when he was presented with a poor usability test results, that it was the users that were stupid and it’s ‘their problem if they didn’t get his design.’ The users in this case were from the physically disabled community who needed to use motability services. Although extreme that attitude isn’t uncommon in my experience.
The above, may explain why usability as a profession is required.
Even though a designer may have a great sense for design and well schooled in usability issues, it’s only by conducting test with end users that moves any design into the realm of what really works, and what doesn’t.
We can talk about reports, theories, experts, heuristics and voodoo, but ultimately real world testing is the only method that matters. From what I have experienced, agencies need to be utilising user testing far more than they do. Only then will we be able to deliver something of real value to users.
July 4th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Sadly it’s not just the web design industry that is affected by this. There is a serious problem with way too many colleges and universities not teaching actual sound design skills. I don’t care if someone spent their entire course learning the inner wizardy of Photoshop - if they don’t have that innate talent for good design, and an understanding of its background, I’m not going to hire them.
“Even though a designer may have a great sense for design and well schooled in usability issues, it’s only by conducting test with end users that moves any design into the realm of what really works, and what doesn’t.”
This is another problem I’ve seen time and time again. Designers, creative directors, MDs, and especially the client, all seem to forget that their personal tastes often DO NOT APPLY. We are here to deliver communication solutions to the end user, and to make them look as good as possible, and perform as good as possible. If it doesn’t perform, it doesn’t work, and therefore the design has failed. Sadly “their problem if they didn’t get the design” is too common a tale, and that’s partly why a lot of people have the opinion that designers are difficult and touchy to work with!
Usability IS good design - end of.
July 10th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
“Usability IS good design - end of.”
Even if it uses Comic Sans?