[IxDA Discuss] Rationale for *not* using UCD

[Doc]

I think a lot more people use an informal user-centred design approach than
the formal UCD methods written about in books. I know Donna does the
occasional piece of user research, for example, and I know that to her the
usefulness of the end result is paramount. And without being anything close
to an expert on the distinctions, an activity-centred approach must in some
way be inspired by the end users who will be performing those activities,
whether that inspiration is explicit or tacit.

So my question back to Leisa is: what do you mean by UCD methodologies and
is there some specific criteria you have in mind for what qualifies an
approach to be or not to be UCD?

On 02/02/07, Donna Maurer <donnam at maadmob.net> wrote:
>
> There is a huge difference between using a formal, defined UCD process
> and being user-centred.
>
> Many of my little projects don't have a formal UCD element (I don't do
> ethnography, make personas, write scenarios, do participatory design
> sessions or usability test) but that doesn't mean I don't know anything
> about the users or think about them. And it doesn't mean the result is
> awful. Sometimes it is truly not worth the effort.
>
> E.g I bet most of the bloggers here didn't do a UCD process before
> starting. I bet you set up and started writing ;) And it doesn't mean
> your blogs are unusable...
>
> Donna
>
> ----------------------------------------------
Steve 'Doc' Baty B.Sc (Maths), M.EC, MBA
Director, User Experience Strategy
Red Square
P: +612 8289 4930
M: +61 417 061 292

Member, UPA - www.upassoc.org
Member, IxDA - www.ixda.org
Member, Web Standards Group - www.webstandardsgroup.org