[ID Discuss] Interaction design == web design

[molly wright steenson]

Well...

Much of (this) world seems to correlate interaction design in the 
following ways:

interaction design=web design
interaction design=usability
interaction=information architecture

and while interaction design can have something to do with all of those 
things, it's really not the only thing it does. To view it as such is 
to give the field of interaction design short shrift. Bill Moggridge 
recently talked about interaction design as being what happens inside 
the computer -- designing the computer itself might be in the realm of 
industrial or product design, but the real way the thing functions is a 
matter of interaction design.

Interaction design is a part of product design, software design, 
architecture, service design, environmental design, graphic design, 
industrial design, urban design ... and web design. It touches 
usability, it touches information architecture and information design. 
I'm a professor at the Interaction Design Institute Ivrea 
(http://www.interaction-ivrea.it), and most of our projects are *not* 
web-based, though that might play a part in how some aspect is 
communicated or delivered -- for instance, it might be a service 
touchpoint, or it might be the overarching communication of a system. 
Our students come from so many broad backgrounds -- all across the 
different fields of design, cognitive psychology, computer science -- 
to funnel it only into a website would be to narrow things down too 
much. Our teaching and projects encompasses user-centered design 
process and strategic design, ambient intelligence and spaces, service 
design... and the potential interfaces might be physical (imagine a 
room that reacts to your voice, or a human-sized, body controlled game 
of Pac Man ... ) or mobile, or web-delivered. Usability (does it really 
work the way we intend?) plays a part. How the thing you make runs and 
flows plays a part.

It seems like you specifically are talking about human factors and HCI. 
That's something that also touches interaction design but is not 
specifically or necessarily interaction design. (Though maybe the folks 
who are going to CHI next week in Vienna might feel differently, and 
I'd love a report!) I would imagine that anyone who's done hardcore HCI 
work and training is going to know how to work with a thick Windows 
application. Usability testing and user-centered design, correctly 
applied, is good for products, spaces, software, websites ...



On Apr 16, 2004, at 9:39 PM, Michael Bartlett wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Just wanted to introduce myself as this is my first posting to the 
> list (I
> have been subscribed for a few weeks now). We have been evolving our 
> own
> form of scenario- and persona-orientated design for the last year 
> which has
> been a big step-change in the way we build our software products. It's 
> been
> a fascinating process as we are strong practioners of eXtreme 
> Programming
> and our developers are very intelligent (and opinionated) C++ coders. 
> It was
> very much a case of "in-mates vs. wardens" prior and even during the
> adoption of this process. And, most importantly with regard to this 
> post: We
> build thick-client Windows software that is effectively glue-ware 
> between
> multiple applications in order to stream-line existing work processes.
>
> Something I'm battling with at the moment is confidence in spending 
> money on
> usability testing/HCI courses because I get the feeling that the 
> industry is
> very web-focused and we build thick-client Windows applications.
>
> Two experiences on this just to validate my position before I ask my
> questions:
>
> 1. Usability Testing
> I decided to conduct a round of usability testing through a 3rd party 
> in
> London on an early'ish Beta of our product. It was the first time we've
> embarked on such a journey and it was indeed an interesting process.
>
> The few companies I researched (there don't appear to be that many in
> London) all had very web-orientated portfolios and seemed very geared 
> up
> towards brand, information architecture and harping on about the back 
> button
> and other such web-centric considerations.
>
> The testing ended up being very successful from my point of view, just
> purely by watching the picture-in-picture footage afterwards. I found 
> the
> report, the recommendations and in fact the instructor to be below my
> expectations. Some of the reasons for this is that our application
> integrates with 1) Microsoft Word, 2) Outlook/Notes/Groupwise and 3)
> Enterprise Document Management Systems 4) PDF creation. So it was a 
> lot for
> the 3rd party that we used to get their head around, as opposed to
> navigating a web site in a single browser interface. So, in 
> retrospect, I
> would have preferred to conduct this myself rather than forking out the
> money for the 3rd party, but I feel that I would probably lead the 
> user and
> make other such mistakes that a professional instructor wouldn't.
>
> Also our software is collaborative in nature and a lot of what I've 
> seen on
> usability testing is a single user with an instructor whereas we have
> complex tasks that often involve mutiple authors editing documents 
> over a
> extended period which is quite difficult to emulate in a typical 
> 45-minute
> study. It's also very challenging to recruit users for this as our 
> clients
> (expensive lawyers!) aren't really able to provide us with their users 
> as
> they are fee-earners and off-the-street recruits generally aren't 
> familiar
> with the working environment in a legal firm and the additional 3rd 
> party
> software that is involved in our scenarios and tasks.
>
> So I felt I did get some value (perhaps fascination at watching users'
> frustration with certain concepts we take for granted), but I'm sure 
> it can
> be done in a better way.
>
> 2. Courses
> I'm interested in attending HFI's new Europe-based course
> (http://www.humanfactors.com/training/useroriented.asp), but looking 
> at the
> schedule there appears to be a lot of very web-centered modules in 
> there -
> such as module 2 which quotes "site design strategy" and "working with 
> brand
> objectives" and module 8 - information architecture. So I'm wary of 
> sending
> 3-4 of my staff on such a course at the risk of their switching off 
> because
> its all "web web web".
>
> I understand that usability is usability and that many of the same
> principles apply, but I feel that a lot of the web "stuff" (for lack 
> of a
> better word - jet lag) is towards presentation of information 
> (site-flow and
> so on). Even the "application" aspect of the web seems to be a lot 
> simpler
> than some of the challenges we face. I don't mean any disrespect at 
> all by
> this statement (that's the last thing I'd do in my first post!), it's 
> merely
> an observation from my experiences as I was involved in interactive web
> application development for 4 years before I joined my current company.
>
> So my questions... well I'm just really open to commentary and 
> suggestions
> on what I've outlined in this email. Perhaps there are more
> application-orientated courses I can attend? What are you experiences 
> in the
> past with multi-user collaborative-environment usability testing? And 
> so on.
>
> Thanks for your time if you've got this far and I look forward to the
> discussion. Please excuse the lack of any response today as I'm just 
> about
> to head off to SFO to fly back to London.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Michael Bartlett
> _______________________________________________
> Interaction Design Discussion List
> discuss at interactiondesigners.com
> --
> to change your options (unsubscribe or set digest): 
> http://discuss.interactiondesigners.com
> --
> Questions: lists at interactiondesigners.com
> --
> Announcement Online List (discussion list members get announcements 
> already)
> http://interactiondesigners.com/announceList/
> --
> http://interactiondesigners.com/
>