I don’t think there is a single person reading this blog that would argue against user experience.

Exactly. Should all products move to the kiosk/online model? Are we better suited, by being our own experts to fufill our own needs? I for one will probably NEVER book a rental car, or buy a CD at a mega store… It is just faster, cheaper, better to do it myself.

But, an argument for service experts is to think about the airline booking interface for you versus the one a agent at the airport uses. They are totally different and manage to serve different users needs to similar ends.

Unfortunately, Travelocity call centers use the Travelocity website to book tickets. I once had a problem with my CC billing address not being in a recognized city, so I called them. I went through all the questions I’d just answered online with a person on the phone and at the end, my billing address wasn’t in a recognized city. In that case the application that serves many well, served me for shit and there was no alternative when I called an expert. I realized I was the expert, told the service man as much and booked my ticket at Expedia in 5 minutes.

Happy Mealdium

For starters if you could serve yourself how go to a service shop in the first place?

And second, assuming it was just a matter of speech, without doubt service providers and client facing employees in particular should always keep in mind the context of the client: why is she coming to us? what is her final goal (”we are but mere links in a chain to allow her to kick ass”). This way to satisfy a client is not a matter of attaining subjective satisfaction but a matter of translating emotions to obtainable and definable goals (you will be satisfied as long as the service/person attending you helps you achieve your goal).

To further dive into this: Kathy Sierra (Creating passionate users) http://headrush.typepad.com/

“Judge others by their intentions and yourself by your results”
http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/01/hindsights_ii_t.html

Regards, Mario

but I guess that is the crux, we are experts at our own lives. The minute details of our schedules and possessions are our passion. Can we really expect to be served as well as we can serve ourselves? [YES!!] I find myself more forgiving of my own failures, online, than of a services failures face to face because I can fix my failures, I have to rely on someone else for theirs.

I also take detailed notice of a successful face to face service, because they are rare and wonder if as designers of service products we should coddle the person user them, McDonalds put pictures on their registers, or demand rocket science from them, airline terminals?

I don’t know about you, but Happy Mealdium is what I’m shooting for, online and face to face.

One difference for sure is: on virtual interactions if you flunk at an activity no one will notice UNLESS you want them to therefor you will only be helped if your net was announced you needed a hand; while at f2f interactions if you make a mistake -specially a really embarrassing one- or act towards mending one (”opening a London map in a corner to see if you are right on track”), someone MIGHT notice even without you wanting to and considering goodness on all human beings you might end being helped

Besides, I believe through unexpected and uncontrolled connections in real live u might find valuable new information and venues to apply in your live. Arguably you can have this kind of cross polinization using online tools (http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2008/05/15/we_travel_in_tribes.html) but since you are controlling the parts of your interactions you are somehow also controlling the universe of unexpected data you might bump into.

If you will like to further discuss this, I am more than willing to travel to Minneapolis in two weeks (sponsor meeeee please *UX Intensive wink*)

Kind regards, Mario