This workshop is an intensive introduction to the topic and landscape of systems.
The focus will be split between between a survey of systems perspectives and theories, and hands-on experience with the tools and techniques used to evaluate and model systems. The coverage of subject matter will be biased towards perspectives and tools that are directly relevant and applicable to the daily work of practicing interaction designers.
The topics covered in the theory and history of systems will include:
The tools and techniques covered will include:
Where possible, contemporary examples of system types as well as tools and techniques will be used. Audience engagement will be a mix of formal lecture, group dialog and group activity.
by Dave Wood
It is difficult to know for certain that the experience of one user will be the same as that for other users, and if other users sense the same things or encounter the world in the same way as each other. Yet interaction designers have to find a way of designing new interactions to suit their target audiences. Alan Cooper argues quite rightly that, “if you’re going to do user-centered design you’ve got to understand the user.”
This half-day workshop will give you, the interaction design professional, direct, hands–on experience of a new low cost methodology you can employ to reveal the meaning of user experiences through interpretation of the user’s experience itself. This emergent methodology will augment your personas within the normal ideation phase of your design process, creating a deeper understanding of what your users actually do, think, feel etc. rather that what they consciously think they know.
The practical workshop’s activities encourage the application of a method to reveal actual user experience through ‘the eyes of the users’ by applying a technique of hermeneutic-semiosis - which means visual interpretation through semiotics.
Themes in workshop include:
* The Essence of Experience;
* The Circle of Interpretation.
Dave will lead you through a process of revealing user experience through a visual hermeneutic circle of interpretation to reveal what was previously hidden. This creates visual stimuli for interaction designers that reveals the essence of what is really happening with the user, in ways that personas and mental models cannot do. Through this new visual interpretive methodology a fresh perspective that illustrates the core phenomenological essence of an experience can be interpreted from the user’s own points-of-view.
During this half-day workshop, we will use a very practical method card approach rather than a dry academic approach. The underlying hermeneutic-semiosis theory that (synthesising aspects of Pragmatism, and Martin Heidegger through C.S. Peirce’s semiotics) acts as a framework for the practical exploration.
You’ll come away with a clear understanding of the principles behind the methodology, and practical ideas that can inform your future interaction designs in new ways. It will also open up the debate as to how Visual Communication can be utilised more in the design of better interactive user experiences.
In the workshop you will:
* Discover how the methodology works through easy-to-use method cards;
* Participate in structured practical activities from the method cards to help show how you can apply it to your projects;
* Understand how to reveal more from your user research to achieve a fuller picture of your users, based on their actual points-of-view;
* Feedback your thoughts from the exercises and help further develop the methodology.
* Identifying themes of an experience—training participants to identify invariant themes in an experience from within user research;
* Revealing essence of experience—applying the principles of the method to reveal hidden user experience;
* Visually interpreting the experience—using a visual hermeneutic circle to refine the revealed experiential essence.
by Jason Nunes
Edison famously said, "I failed my way to success." In the interactive world, we've all heard the buzz phrases about failing fast, and how failure--particularly in the form of prototyping--can be a powerful design tool. But what about real failure? We've all experienced projects that never got off the ground, or crashed and burned stunningly. We don't put them in our portfolios. We only talk about them when we've had one drink too many. What can we learn from our embarrassments? And are there really things we can learn by failing, especially in the agency and consulting worlds, where we are hired for our expertise, and infallibility?
Questions to think about:
Can there be actual power, and knowledge in failure? What is your biggest failure, and what did you learn from it?
What are the different ways you can fail? Have you ever had a "successful" project that was a personal failure? Why? What can you learn from it?
Why are we so afraid of failing? What are the negative consequences of failure? And how can we encourage a positive viewpoint on failure?
How can we pull victory from the flames of defeat? How do you not panic when you sense yourself failing? How can you use your failure to inform future successes?
How can we build an acceptance of failure into a design or consulting practice? How can we get away from always having to be right, and move towards creative adaptability?
The UxPA poster "UCD board game" is exposed in many IT and design offices. It's a brilliant tool for spreading UX methods in a fun way. It’s also a good gamification example about complexe concepts and methods. It’s simple to follow the UX process. To extend this concept, the workshop "Game of Prototype" will try to make this poster tangible with prototyping tools thema.
Like in the Game of the Goose, “Game of Prototype” participants will play to discover the benefits of using prototyping methods. From the definition of user needs to the deliverables, players will identify issues related to prototyping through short serious game sessions. Each session will show a method or a tool connected with the art of prototyping: persona, user research, sketching, usability testing, wireframing, tools, etc.
So, each serious game will be followed by an exchange time about the issue addressed to collect good practices. For example, they will discover the persona concept around a mimic game where players will have to guess a persona to the others. At the end of this session, we will explain shortly how to make and to use a persona in a project.
During the game, a parallel session will be organized about apps prototyping "Game of prototype" for different devices. Thus, participants will experiment the methods which have been see through the game.
During this two part session, Micah Hrehovcsik will first give a talk about gamification design, in which he explains the term and gives examples of best practices. We will show that current gamification is often limited to one game form (competition), while there are numerous other possibilities.
This presentation is followed by a brainstorm session and open discussions. Participants work with a case from the field of healthcare, government or education. They will get tips and inspiration on how to 'gamify' these problems in an original way. In the end participants present their ideas to the other groups. The take-away from this session is a broader perspective on gamification and its design.
No one admits it but too often, requirements are just guesses. To cover up this uncomfortable fact, software managers do a vast amount to work on requirements: they pre-plan in painstaking detail, outlining every possible scenario, use case, back-end integration point, and business rule. The end result of all this planning? Too often, it’s disappointment, frustration, and vast sums of wasted money.
Instead of all this guessing, shouldn't we just call requirements what they are--hypotheses--and work as quickly as we can to figure out if we're right it wrong?
In the last two years, Josh Seiden and Jeff Gothelf have been working with software teams to do exactly this. Working closely together in small, cross-functional groups, these Agile teams use Lean UX methods to take risk out of the software development process by validating requirements in an ongoing way as they are designing and building software. The key technique they use here is the hypothesis.
This workshop will be a half-day deep dive into using hypotheses to manage your design process. It will cover the following topics:
* Identifying assumptions, why this is so important, and how to do it.
* The assumptions canvas—your key tool for managing assumptions—and connecting your work to business strategy.
* Translating assumptions into hypotheses.
* How to write good hypotheses for software teams.
* Testing hypotheses: how do hypotheses, experiments, and MVP’s (minimum viable products) work together
* Putting it all together in an agile rhythm.
Using a mix of lecture, hands-on exercises, and discussion, this is a fast-paced, practical workshop. You’ll leave with hands-on experience with a method you can apply immediately in your work.
by Lis Hubert
Are you an interaction designer looking to move beyond the wireframe? Or maybe you’re a designer or developer who is trying to learn how to get more direction and insight than the simple wireframe provides? Either way this workshop is for you! In it, we will conduct and investigate design thinking that needs to happen outside of the interface to help set project direction, gain team consensus, and ensure project success.
What You'll Learn
• Improved and expanded designing thinking skills
• Applicable knowledge of interaction design beyond the wireframes
• Hands on, practical workshop
This workshop is about building an effective and nimble user centred product team building great products for a global audience. It’s about deciding what a Minimum Viable Product really is and [the hard part:] what to do once you've got one. I'll go behind the scenes at Optimal Workshop to discuss our design and development process, how we handle customer support and how the two are intertwined for the good of our customers.
We'll discuss the importance of design in every aspect of the work you do and how the subtleties of user interaction and experience can make or break your business.
We'll pull together concepts from the Lean Startup movement (a/b testing to ensure business success), Agile UX (designing while sprinting), the good things to learn from waterfall projects for internal teams (set big goals and break them down) and to discuss the practical tools that small teams can use to win.
UX has hit puberty. Clients and stakeholders are aware of terms like ecosystems, user journeys, and touch-points, but their understanding of exactly what these things are and how to use them for shaping a meaningful strategy is still fuzzy. Business owners now believe that customer experience is one of the best sources for long-term competitive advantages, but they still struggle to foster and achieve great experiences.
The good news is that clients increasing look to UX designers for answers about how our work can bring their business strategy to life. We are in a unique position to help companies evolve their strategy so that every touch-point becomes an opportunity for a great user experience. The catch is that to be successful, we must be fluent in the C-speak, the language of C-level executives and business directors, so we can help them recognize pain points and take the right steps to improving the user experience for their product, service, or brand.
There is a more strategic role for designers, but traditional design skills will only get you so far. To get a seat at the table with C-level stakeholders and deciders, you must acquire new communication skills and new know-how. This workshop will cover:
* C-speak 101 – The language of business strategy
* What UX can add to the conversation that others can’t
* 5 capabilities to add to your repertoire
* Creating visualizations for strategic frameworks
* Techniques for communicating decision makers
Designers are not generally taught how to define opportunities in ways that are credible in a business context. By learning to speak the language of C-level executives and senior business managers, we can communicate how all channels and touch-points must work together not just stylistically but with strategic intelligence to create a true and lasting value exchange between businesses and customers.
Are you an IxDA Local Leader? Or would you like to lead an IxDA Local Group in your home town? If so, come join us at the annual Local Leaders Workshop. Get together with both seasoned and new Local Leaders to discuss strategies for designing a passionate IxDA community in your area. You will walk away with new event ideas and a fresh perspective.
The discussion will be structured with a mix of topics presented by a variety of Local Leaders. Also, we will spend part of the time discussing each region's events, successes and challenges.
As UX professionals we spend a ton of time talking about a variety of design languages but relatively little time talking about or defining a language for planning and nurturing our careers.
Having spent two decades working at a variety of companies I have experience with a variety of managers. While my role was very similar from company to company the managers’ backgrounds were radically different: Some were design experts, others hard core engineers, and a number were MBA’s with excellent leadership skills. Not once did I encounter a manager who could converse equally well about design expertise and provide effective guidance for advancing my career.
After 17 years working as an individual contributor I made the switch to full-time management. This experience has given me an entirely new perspective on the role of management and the depth of our responsibilities for developing UX careers. The transition of the past few years has been challenging, enlightening and highly educational. Of the many challenges, none were greater than providing consistent, concrete and actionable coaching feedback to my team members. If I was full of energy the discussion was lively, deep and extremely fruitful for the employee. If I was fatigued at the end of the day I would provide the bare essentials. This was deeply frustrating and motivated me to find a way to ensure equally fruitful discussions for everyone.
Interaction design, user experience, product design - whatever you want to call it - the time has come for a standardized career framework to emerge, be put into practice, and evolved through usage, feedback and open dialogs. As UX practitioners we need to take control of our careers and as managers we need to lay the groundwork for upcoming generations.
This workshop will focus on a few key assets and concepts:
1. A career ladder
2. A career and coaching framework
3. A tool for assessing both an employee’s skill set and morale
Managers should leave the workshop with a formal structural understanding of the various dimensions (and sub-dimensions) that constitute a career in UX and how to apply this structure to their workplace. The primary goal is to facilitate conversations between managers and employees and empower the latter.
Individual contributors should leave the workshop with the same formal understanding of the dimensions related to their careers but with a focus on helping employees both plan their careers and initiate effective conversations with their managers.
As presenters we will leave the workshop with invaluable feedback from our peers, a broader perspective on the variety of careers and companies in the world, and the chance to iterate our model and re-share it with the IxDA community.
by Ray DeLaPena
Everyone is talking about sketching and how important it is. There are dozens of processes and techniques out there instructing us on how to sketch better. This workshop, however, is not process or technique-specific, but rather an accessible framework for understanding sketching to help communication, understanding, and problem solving.
I propose that every kind of sketching activity falls into one of three categories, and in this workshop we will cover these three modalities; thinking, talking, and showing.
For each type of sketching we will cover:
- Who it helps
- What it is
- When it can help
- Why you don't need to "know how to draw" to use it
- How to be prepared to use it
You don’t even need to know how to “draw” to learn and apply the methods we’ll be covering. After attending this session you will be more comfortable with and better prepared to recognize opportunities where sketching can be used to increase communication and understanding with clients, stakeholders, coworkers, as well as all by yourself, as you work through problems and come up with solutions.
All our actions are interactions.
In today’s world, we do not exist in isolation; we are all highly interconnected and deeply interdependent. Today’s challenges affect everyone and we need everyone’s involvement to address them.
Meanwhile, the root of many of our world challenges today is fragmentation: fragmented thinking, fragmented behaviors & fragmented solutions. To tackle these challenges, we need eloquent and crossbreed solutions. From fragmented thinking, we need to shift to comprehensive innovation, and I believe that the essence of comprehensive innovation is human interaction.
By ‘human interaction’, I refer to interaction in its different forms and contexts. Beyond the digital realm of interactive design, and beyond the concept of user experience, human interaction includes people’s verbal and nonverbal interactions with each others, with objects and with each others through objects. Whatever the interaction and whomever the parties involved, it is crucial that human interaction is always considered in the context of its environment. An interaction between two people in space, for example, is part of a larger network of interactions, including each person’s interaction with space. The Language of space and the language of people in space is a foundational component of human interaction.
I believe we cannot design interaction itself. Instead, we can design for interaction. We need to design the context for interaction to emerge, a context that embodies the qualities of a human context: incomplete, impermanent, imperfect. It is everyone’s responsibility, including designers and architects, to design the context for human interaction.
So how can we create contexts for human interaction?
As an architect, space is my language. Whatever your language may be, I believe it is only a tool and only relevant in light of the interaction it can stimulate and the enhanced experience it can offer. The focus is on the process rather than the product. This shift of focus implies a shift of behaviors: we now have to shift our designer role from a dictator to a facilitator. We now have new roles; we now have to have new roles. The role of facilitator is what allows us to mature from fragmented thinking to comprehensive innovation.
So how can we create contexts for interaction? The process of designing for interaction can in itself become the context for interaction. We can’t design innovation; instead we design the context for it. Designing the context for interaction is key to designing our future, because after all, all our actions are interactions.
This presentation will introduce the topic of interaction design in the context of the city as interface. With reference to an urban re-development program in the Netherlands, a range of public installations will be presented to illustrate how a focus on the end-user experience and the application of key experience design principles has been pushing the boundaries of traditional approaches to urban re-development.
Lorna Goulden will introduce the audience to Strijp-S, a 66-acre former industrial site that once belonged to Philips and is being developed into an inspiring creative quarter close to the city center of Eindhoven. In 2008, whilst a creative director at Philips Design, Lorna authored an award winning vision document “Strijp-S: Creating a Public Lighting Experience” which outlined the strategic direction for an innovative lighting plan and presented a set of ‘experience scenarios’: examples of how people in the future would experience the public space of Strijp-S as they go about their daily lives.
This vision for Strijp-S was developed in line with the innovation and sustainability ambitions of the city council and their development partner Volker Wessels. The goal was to also outline a new approach to the design of the public space, one that would more closely reflect the changing usage patterns and varying contexts of a dynamic urban re-development; and one that would also be fostered to develop iteratively over time in the form of a test-bed or living lab. This living lab function was envisaged to support the initiation of a closer interaction between designers, researchers, manufacturers and citizens – creating an incubator for technology and innovation to develop towards more relevant and desirable user experiences.
The end of 2013 will mark the final installation of a range of innovative projects comprising the Light-S program which constitute the transformation of the vision into a reality encompassing the entire Strijp-S location. One of the biggest challenges has been the departure from a traditional approach to urban development; rather than designs being specified and fixed before construction, the Light-S program by its very nature incorporates a core of flexible dynamic systems, and requires a phase of iterative co-development to define the eventual content and behaviours.
Light-S aims to challenge the way that we think about public lighting, a new language of interaction has yet to evolve, one intended to directly influence and enhance the experience of the citizens in the urban environment. Utilizing the capabilities of existing and emerging technologies a number of innovation questions have been posed: What if light is made tangible? What if light becomes interactive and responsive to changing events and activities in the public space? What are the new languages of interaction in the public space that these innovative lighting systems will inspire? What is the role of interactive lighting in city branding? It will be the task of the living lab and an iterative co-development process to uncover the answers to these questions as well as uncovering new questions for consideration.
As humans strive to design ever more sophisticated interfaces and experiences, it’s clear we need new models –and new languages– to guide the way. Looking across disciplines for inspiration, we find that biological systems have been perfecting interfaces for eons. Where animals and plants are the users, and ecological systems are the screens upon which interactions, relationships and experiences play out, evolution has produced ingenious design solutions to seriously complex UI/UX problems. Over millions of years, the natural selection of interactions has resulted in a wealth of elegant processes (bees pollinating plants, for example) that mold individual behavior for long-term fitness.
All of this leaves us wondering:
Is there a universal language that nature uses to communicate with itself? The answer appears to be yes, and the language appears to be UI.
So, is there something hidden in nature’s language of interfaces that might reveal a system for designing the next generation of interactions between people and things?
What might studying these ecological interactions, and associated interfaces, teach us about our views on UI/UX?
What tricks does the natural world employ to signal, filter noise, prevent errors, and make system status visible?
In constantly evolving ecological systems, how do nature’s interfaces adapt to meet the needs of it’s users?
In nature, relationships are everything. An ecosystem, in fact, is defined by it’s dynamic network of relationships and complex interactions. To succeed, individuals need the system to thrive, just as the system needs individuals to flourish. As a result, individuals, populations and communities –be they ants or orangutans (or humans?)– are constantly in dialogue, 24/7/365, give or take four billion years. Add to the mix that natural systems are constantly evolving, forever adapting to the needs of individuals and communities –as well as perturbations to the system– and you’ve got some rich fodder for design inspiration.
In this provocative talk, we’ll:
1) Draw useful connections between the UI of Nature and the nature of UI
2) Highlight some jaw-dropping examples of UI in the natural world
3) Articulate a set of ecologically inspired principles that can be applied to designing leading edge interactions between people and things
4) Present case studies that demonstrate opportunities for next generation Interaction Design
by Steve Baty
In focusing on the users' experience with our digital products we have come to believe that the experience is the most important goal of our design efforts. But for our clients, they care much more for the behaviour of the people in the system - the sales and abandonments, the referrals and repeat business, the loyalty and social contacts. Designing for behaviour - at the individual and aggregate levels - offers a very direct means of delivering on those goals.
The idea of designing for the experience of the user has become firmly embedded in our practice. In doing so many thousands of digital services have been improved. There is very real benefit to designing digital services with a clear vision for the user's experience - we better understand their context, their mindset, their goals and broader activity, and the things that cause them frustration and pleasure.
As a reaction against the Functional Requirements model of design that dominated the '80s and '90s, a shift to the experience of use offered a very superior approach.
For the organisation, the theory (and some good evidence) suggests that a better experience will lead to more of the desired behaviours. This indirect approach is well-meaning, but requires client organisations to not only buy into the value of an improved experience, but also the connection between experience and behaviour.
The reality for the designer is that in many cases they simply look to design for the behaviour of users, and take into account the experience as a secondary effect. Rather than focusing on emotional responses as the main objective, we can focus on the target behaviours and how to shape them.
This talk will outline the key inputs in a model of Behavioural Design and how those inputs help designers to directly target specific behaviours. It will look at the role of interaction design, behavioural psychology, systems thinking and other tools. And it will propose that a model of design with behaviour as its focus offers a coherent and complete approach to design in a way that is consistent with the goals of client organisations.
by Anneli Olsen
Let’s face it – cats are probably the most selfish and self-absorbed creatures on the planet. Everything we’d hate in another human being, we love in our cats. So how have they succeeded in becoming one of our favorite pets? Whatever they’re doing must be a hell of a user experience.
In this talk I’ll present some of the key things I’ve learned by doing a user experience evaluation of my cat.
Designing for the web has made interaction designers lazy.
Before the web, we had to care about making interactions efficient because they were for pinstriped businesses or high-pressure environments like aircraft cockpits.
The web changed the rules.
With the web, interfaces had to be easy for the millions of new users who were coming online. Meeting that challenge undoubtedly made interfaces better. But our designs no longer had to be efficient – people just had to think they were efficient.
For users, sitting home at their computers, it's hard to judge the passage of time. That means there's a big difference between perceived efficiency and actual efficiency. Little by little, we've lost our our ability to design for actual efficiency.
But perceived efficiency is no longer good enough. We need to create interfaces that people can glance at, use with a flick of the wrist or check a dozen times an hour.
In this talk, I'll explain why this matters. How improvements in interactions that are so small they're hard to measure can end up making a huge difference to user experience. I'll discuss how companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars making interactions more efficient and why it pays off.
I'll look at what stops us designing for efficiency. In most cases efficiency is not even recognised as a design requirement. Often, designers mistakenly reject the most efficient designs. We user test our designs in ways that lead us to choose the least efficient iterations – ones that frustrate users in the real world. I'll give practical advice on how to change that.
I'll also investigate perceived efficiency. After all, for years we managed to fool users into thinking that the web was efficient. What were the tricks of the mind we relied on? What does the psychology of analysing conversations have to teach us? And what design patterns have we become used to pushing at users that are holding us back from more inventive, efficient solutions?
Of course efficiency on it's own isn't enough. In fact, as I'll show, it can be terrible. Interactions also need to be usable and satisfying. I'll discuss how to find the right balance.
I'll distill all that down into some techniques and rules the audience can apply immediately to measure and improve their designs.
Along the way, I'll offer plenty of examples, and a few surprises.
by Lea Ward
How can governments encourage those who have been dependent on social assistance for years to find their own way in society? The Dutch city of The Hague looks to answer that question with a new programme: “Door-to-Door for Change”.
“Door-to-Door for Change” is a pilot project that targets 150 families in The Hague who have been on social assistance for at least 3 years. The goal is to have 15% of parents find work and 50% increase their community engagement through volunteer work or neighbourhood activities. Research suggests that having parents work and being involved in the community increases chances of future success for their children.
To be successful, “Door-to-Door for Change” needed to answer 2 difficult questions:
Understanding users and their context
A structured design process started with delving into the needs of the two groups who are key to the project outcome: the families and the social workers.
The project team reviewed 50+ in-depth interviews among people long dependent on social assistance to gain insight into the different attitudes, objectives and capabilities. They identified 6 distinct groups, each with their own needs vs. the programme.
As for the social workers, the team interviewed and observed them at work. Though committed and highly experienced, many have been working exclusively for the city and are used to the procedures and forms that come with city work. New tools that put forms aside and encourage an active dialogue between parent and social worker were crucial here.
Based on extensive contextual and user research, the programme and supporting materials were designed that built on the underlying motivations of both parents and social workers.
To encourage parents to find work, the design starts from their own motivation. During house visits social workers start by having participants identify why they would want to work, if they could. Is it for the money? To be a better role model? To feel better physically & mentally? They identify their own personal “what’s in it for me?”. The reasons are used to guide and shape the programme participants follow to find work. Social workers register their progress versus that goal in a digital system.
For social workers, their need for an active dialogue and open communication was crucial for the design. The programme uses a visual language with simple text in an informal, non-bureaucratic style. This creates a more human relationship between family and social worker. The cards, supporting materials and the digital system that follows the progress further help social workers to truly interact with participants.
* 500 families in 2013 visited
* While initially skeptical, now all enthusiastic and convinced social workers
* Engaged, goal focused participants, expressing hope and motivation – first results look positive
by Jonathan Rez
We live in a predominantly physical world. In our daily lives we traverse urban environments and have interactions within tangible spaces.
These spaces are comprised of physical landscapes, which are inundated with 2D and 3D elements – the lexicon of the city. Careful choreography of such elements ensures that environments communicate information, express meaning, influence our experience and shape our behaviour on a daily basis.
The experiences we have within the physical realm are designed by architects and urban planners. Compared with these venerable professions, which have accumulated wisdom spanning millennia, UX is but a toddler. It runs around skilfully, but has much to learn as it matures.
In this presentation I will share some of the lessons I have learnt along the way, while working with urban planners and architects, to create and improve human experiences in the built environment.
Some of the specifics to be covered in the talk include:
1. Introduction to the field of experience design within physical environments
2. What characterises people's behaviour in physical spaces, and how are spaces designed to support people's needs
3. How to design experiences in the built environment, and what are helpful methodologies
4. I will share anecdotes from projects I worked on to help bring to life learnings which will be relevant to the IxD community.
We are good in designing usable and engaging products and services. We understand the user's needs and have a toolkit with dozens of deliverables. But for some reason a lot of designers find it difficult to sell an idea or concept to their team members, managers or clients. After this session that problem will be solved!
Selling your ideas and convincing others is one of the most undervalued assets in our field. This ranges from convincing a colleague to use a certain design pattern to selling research to your boss and convincing a client to go for your concept. You can come up with the best ideas in the world, but if it is presented in the wrong way these ideas will die a lonely dead. This is sad, because everybody can learn the techniques to bring a message across. The main thing is that you know what to pay attention to.
In this session I will take you on a journey through the world of presenting ideas. You will see and hear examples of good pitches, learn how others think and in the end know how to sell your ideas. We will move through the heads of clients and your colleagues, learn what their thoughts and needs are. We will move to the core of your idea and into the world of psychology and philosophy.
It will be an epic journey.
Who are most efficient and effective learners you can think off? Children are, they need to learn a lot to be able to live independently and cope with daily life, and they learn mainly by play. In play exploration, trial and error in a safe environment is vital to educate knowledge, skills and behaviour. Games are often being dismissed as “It’s just a game!” and not taken seriously as a strong tool to engage people and achieve more than “just” for fun only.
To know how a game is designed or game elements can be applied as a tool for behaviour change we need to investigate the context of a game:
“Summing up the formal characteristics of play we might call it a free activity standing quite consciously outside ‘ordinary’ life as being ‘not serious’, but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly”. [Johan Huizinga: Homo Ludens 1938]
Based on the description of Johan Huizinga's 'state of play' a model is created; A magic game circle is defined by 1) player = the person interacting 2) play = interaction including the meaning the player gives/feels in the goal and rules 3 game = the definition of the rules and goals.
If we are able by using this MGC-model to design games in its wider context of games being played by different player-types within an even wider context of real life we might be able to provide games as a sustainable intrinsically motivational tool for people to become players to learn to cope with life.
Freedom, safety and trust are most important matters to take in account when designing games or attempt to facilitate a magic game circle for a user to get in a state of play. Does my player feel safe to play, is he/she able to play, does he/she understand the game, does he/she trust the rules or game, does he experience freedom to play?
If designed well games can be inviting and persuasive and even addictive. Game elements are like ingredients, there is an increasing amount of cooks, restaurants, kitchens, cookbooks, spices and flavours but no consensus is yet found what is play and how it is perceived. The magic game circle can help as a tool to discuss these elements and recipes in a constructive way.
by Chris Clark
When we talk with our bosses, buddies, children and customers we have distinct manners of speaking; each group gets a different vocabulary and grammar. Whether we're showing respect, showing off, or just trying to find common ground, we all specially tailor the way we speak to our audience. And we do it without trying or really knowing why.
When you're designing interactions you're doing the same. Our onscreen work -- from marketing copy to UI labels, push notifications and support scripts -- is crawling with text; words are a key part of every web site and mobile app, and they're saying more than we know. Every turn of phrase reveals a legacy of design decisions and company politics, but most importantly they invite our customers to try and figure out *what we think of them*. Do we talk to our customers like royalty? Friends? Idiots?
The words we use can invite or exclude, empower or admonish. This session is a crash course in sociolinguistics, and a challenge to identify and iterate on the messages hidden in your own products' copy.
For the last years we all were substituting responsive design by designing for mobile, tablet and desktop computer devices; actually nothing more than screen-sizes and input methods. And with that we were so sure that we were successfully predicting context (this guy is out in the streets), intention (and he wants to find our location) and restrictions (for which he can only use his thumb).
But these times are over: mobile devices have conquered the living room and the desktop has transformed into the mobile office. We strongly belief that not the amount of pixels on the screen determine the user’s experience but her situational being in current time, location and real world context. We must curate more thoroughly!
Today we need to talk about how we create services that not just run on any device but especially deliver experiences that create superb value for the users in their personal situation. Those services are aware of what people do, want, need, who they are with, which time and which conditions and what restrictions they have to deal with. This has to be accessed on a level far beyond just the device that calls the service.
Our talk is about he we tackle this resulting complexity and analyses the possibilities we are given as the designer of tomorrow’s connected products. We pair up our research with tangible examples from the industry and hands-on advice. This is about exploring the opportunities as well as challenges we face when we try to overcome responsive interfaces to get to truly adaptive service offerings.
Designing large UX projects is a tricky business, particularly when they involve complex requirements, multiple stakeholders, ambitious deliverables and tight timescales.
It’s the part of the design process that no one seems to talk about. Which is strange, as the approach we take can make or break our projects. How do we choose the right techniques? How do we decide the order in which to do things? How do we keep true to the ideals of user centred design within the constraints of a commercial environment? How should our approach flex to accommodate new requirements? How can we keep our ideas fresh in a world of ever-evolving technologies?
In this talk we will share our approach to this dark art. We will survey our peers within UX consultancies and client-side teams to gather and present a range of responses to designing UX projects. We will examine the similarities and differences between the contrasting approaches. We will investigate what makes a meaningful design project.
We all know that the project we design after an initial meeting is never the same as the one we actually deliver. In the second half of this talk we will explore some of the classic challenges that we face during our projects. When and how do we change our project's design? How do we balance conflicting user and business requirements? How do we deal with the politics? What if we're expected to work a UX miracle or two in a single day? We’ll explore the typical problems we face, the disasters we have overcome and also share some of our favourite tips and tricks when it comes to keeping things on track (and on time and budget).
Behind every successful design engagement is a well-rounded dynamic team. However, the culture and expectations of design agencies are largely built around the outspoken, gregarious personality. Furthermore, as agencies and companies have become more and more global, it’s likely you’ll only encounter more emphasis on extroverted styles of working, no matter where you live. Group brainstorming, on-the-fly presentations, and open workspaces have become the norm in design settings. For many of us, encountering personality types with more intensity than a high school debate team has become a daily challenge, so how can we all be successful while still staying true to our naturally-effective styles of working and communicating?
When people think of “creatives,” the stereotype is often that of a very outspoken, extroverted, no-holds-barred personality. But we suspected that a lot of people who excel at, and are passionate about design – specifically UX design – are actually more quiet and introverted.
As fellow introverted UX designers ourselves, we were excited see a more recent emphasis on introversion coming to light as strengths rather than flaws. We were delighted to see TED talks, New York Times articles and a few lauded books all focused on introversion being heartily discussed and embraced in the media. Even better, we were learning that a good balance of extroverted and introverted strengths can elevate great ideas and teams alike.
The fact that there were at least two UX designers who resonated with all of this had to mean that there were other introverted designers out there. So, we set out to discover just how many designers tend to be more on the introverted spectrum, and also uncover what makes them successful, what makes them tick, and how they use their introverted qualities to round out their teams and create great designs and experiences.
We poured over findings from surveying more than 100 people about the topic, as well as 6 one-on-one interviews, a group discussion with 20 UX designers and a handful of anecdotes from some of our introverted colleagues and friends.
We heard deeply personal stories about lessons learned when going against natural tendencies and pretending to be a gregarious and spontaneous conversationalist, and inspirational stories about how displaying quiet confidence can be effective when dealing with powerfully strong voices in a large meeting.
Whether the idea of introversion speaks to you, or you more readily identify with more extroverted qualities, everyone can benefit from tapping into their quiet side and encouraging others to do the same. It’s our hope that our findings inspire others in similar positions as ourselves, and to inform all of us on the introvert/extrovert spectrum of the amazing differences in strengths we all possess that, when combined, make up super teams of professionals.
5th–8th February 2014