A product’s experience goes beyond User Experience
by Andrew CrowI’m dropping the word “user” from user experience. Flame on.
First, I’m not suggesting anyone forget the user – the person using the thing – from our consideration. Quite the contrary. I believe that the user should always come first in any design discussion, even initially above business needs.
What I am proposing is that today’s consumer electronics are much more than a traditional human-computer interaction. It’s no longer enough to think solely about the user and how she works with the device. It’s not good enough to think about the user’s context or the persona. The experience of a device reaches well beyond a person’s relationship with the product.
Today’s devices are part of a larger ecosystem of things. Smart phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops are examples of connected machines. But there are watches, refrigerators, DVRs, TVs, even picture frames that rely on a linked situation. These things are most complete when they interact with content and other data that comes from a system.
And those are the obvious examples. Nearly every consumer product is designed to live within an ecosystem. Just look at anything from IKEA or CB2. These stores carry products that use aesthetics to fit into a system – fancy vacuums are designed to fit in your home’s decor; chairs that match the entertainment center; my Apple mouse that’s designed to match my Apple computer.
When designing a product, it’s important to recognize (at least) three things. First, and foremost, are solutions to the end user’s problems. Second, the ecosystem that this product lives within. And third, the business needs that eventually allow the product to exist.
Designing products with an ecosystem in mind provides valuable insight and great design constraints. Often this means exploring what things are failing certain user needs. If that vacuum doesn’t suck up dirt well enough, then let’s design one that doesn’t lose suction. It also means exploring a competitive landscape. There isn’t any other vacuum out there that sucks up cat hair, then let’s design one that does. Often it means exploring a visual design that conveys a lifestyle. If the other vacuums out there look like boxes with a stick, then let’s design something that makes the user feel like they look great doing it. It even means exploring other devices that are already present in the user’s lifestyle. If a big, whole-house vacuum is already present, let’s design a smaller, grab-and-go vacuum for smaller jobs.
The problems that products are designed to solve require the use of many design disciplines. Some of these design efforts work directly at the user’s interaction while others are employed to address the business’ bottom line. But all of these design considerations affect, and sometimes create, an intended experience for the product.
While I will continue to put the user’s needs at the beginning of every design effort, I encourage us change our discourse to include the idea of a product experience, instead of the experience that only deals with the user.
Entries (RSS)
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:13 am
Interesting concept and the broader scope is well made, but isn’t that a little too much ‘if a tree falls in the woods ..’?
I mean a users experience is already influenced by the overall product experience (how it fits and potentially compliments other products the user has) isn’t it? As well as, or rather than, the use of the product in a vacuum. But it’s still an overall user experience isn’t it?
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:30 am
How about we stop creating names?
There is nothing that you mentionned in the Product Experience that is not in the User Experience cycle of activities. The first stage of a user-centered approach is to understand the product in its context (ISO 13407). The main problem is that you are defining the User Experience as the Experience of the User without any reference to the product when in fact the word Experience implies the presence of the product.
I suggest we read the beautiful definition that Norman and Nielsen suggested: “User experience encompasses all aspects of the end-user’s interaction with the company, its services and its products. The first requirement for an exemplary user experience is to meet the exact needs of the customer, without fuss or bother. Next, come simplicity and elegance that product products that are a joy to own, a joy to use.
True user experience goes FAR BEYOND giving customers what they say they want or providing checklist features. In order to achieve high-quality user experience in a company’s offerings there must be seamless merging of the services of multiple disciplines, including engineering, marketing, graphical and industrial design, and interface design”
March 2nd, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Backing Dory on the nod to Norman who coined User Experience Design… that build the book (you know, that Element’s of… one) that built–certainly helped–AP.
When AP’s own Merholz interviewed Norman, the man himself stated, “User experience is really the whole totality. Opening the packag… good example. It’s the total experience that matters. And that starts from when you first hear about a product… experience is more based upon memory than reality…”. http://uxdesign.com/events/article/don-norman-interview-ux-video/49
Historically, “user” usage comes from the HCI domain. Lose it and lose the benefits of HCI’s accumulated academic credibility with it, is my view. That is, if talking interactive (software), use “user…”, if not, don’t. This keeps it simple and true and consistent too.
In The Inmates are Running the Asylum, Cooper says “a product plus software equals software product.” (Paraphrased.) So when isn’t it “User” experience? When you’re designing something with no interactive digital software component, is when.
Are we just addicted to change? It has been good to us. But a little continuity and stability of terms certainly won’t hurt us at this stage. As if there isn’t enough confusion and misunderstanding around the term already.
Putting aside the fact that such usage is well beyond one individual’s control, even yours, Andrew, let’s recognize that AP has been on this track away from digital/interactive and towards designing anything for quite some time. A lot of the content coming from AP comes from this strategic vision, I’d venture. And this isn’t criticism. Why just be a web design company when the market is saturated and you can sell so many other design/strategy services? Good on you. I just don’t think that means the rest of us ducklings must follow, is all.
March 3rd, 2010 at 4:03 am
[...] adaptive path » blog » Andrew Crow » A product's experience goes … Social Bookmarking [...]
March 3rd, 2010 at 4:05 am
[...] A product’s experience goes beyond User Experience What I am proposing is that today’s consumer electronics are much more than a traditional human-computer interaction. It’s no longer enough to think solely about the user and how she works with the device. Today’s devices are part of a larger ecosystem of things. Smart phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops are examples of connected machines. (tags: ux future) [...]
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:55 am
All good points. And, to be clear, I was not attempting to redefine “user experience”. The definitions that are available continue to serve us well. I have no contention with them.
The genesis of this post was based on a recent trend I’ve experienced where companies want “great user experience” in their products. At first blush, that’s an amazing accomplishment for those of us who have been beating the user experience drum for years.
However, this trend has some companies mistaking a great UI for a great UX. If anything, I’m reacting to the pendulum swinging far to the side of heavy emphasis on interaction design as the main executor of a good user experience. And, while I will always be a die-hard interaction designer, I struggle to remind clients that there is more to a good user experience than a flashy user interface, or apps.
I don’t disagree or dispute the passionate opinions in the comments of this thread. Fortunately, there are many designers who understand the subtleties of what user experience really means. I raise these points to highlight that good product experiences spring from multiple sources. Getting your feet wet in all of them help ensure quality experiences for everyone.
March 4th, 2010 at 6:00 am
I agree with this post. The enshrinement of design — even most design for the user experience — reminds me of those architectural renderings of skyscrapers, all alone and heroic on a piece of paper. The real skyscraper, of course, has to live on a block with other buildings, and be connected to water, sewer, electricity, etc. Plus have flashing lights on top so planes don’t crash into it.
One way of stating this is that products have lives of their own, far from users. They have relationships with other products and systems — the ecosystem you mention. These relationships are real, and beyond the control of the consumer. There is also a time dimension: these ecosystems evolve rapidly, and each critter must adjust.
In the long run, this approach focuses more on a market view of products — the market is the environment in which products thrive or die out. Successful features (even superficial ones) are adopted by others in the ecosystem, and then may be replaced by other features. Some products are primary, while others only provide support — look at the relationship between pencils and pencil sharpeners. Even primary products interact this way — look at how pencils and paper interact in texture/toothiness, erasability. Then look at the competitive relationship among pencils, pens, typewriters, word processors, etc.
I have some animations about this, which I use in trainings; I don’t know how intelligible they are without my lustrous narration:
http://inclusive.com/AMP/prodEcol/prodEcol02.swf
[substiture '03' through '06' for '02' in that URL for more animations; your spam detector didn't like it when I tried to post them all.]
There may be limits to the ecosystem analogy, but it seems pretty sound to me. Anything to help designers get over themselves!
March 5th, 2010 at 11:37 am
It sounds like you’re saying that too many people think “user experience” means “user interface”, so instead of correcting them or using the term correctly, you’ll just use another term.
And the term you’ve apparently chosen, “product experience”, seems to me to be even more likely to be interpreted to mean the experience interacting with a self-contained “product”, not the whole ecosystem.
What’s more, a good deal of the things you lump under product experience already have disciplines associated with them, disciplines that are largely invisible or irrelevant to the user’s experience of a product: manufacturing, pricing, marketing. To call these “experiences” is quite a stretch.
Keep talking about “user experiences” (and FWIW I doubt you’ll actually pull off your lead’s promise). Talk about “ecosystem experiences”. But “product experience” will probably only end up conjuring up images of Consumer Reports reviewing how well a mechanical device works, the opposite of what you’re trying to call attention to.
March 6th, 2010 at 4:43 am
Dory, I totally agree.
There is no perfekt name that describes the concrete Detail and the overall picture in just two words. The Users experience always is about product, company and everything that surrounds him and those two.
I especially dont like the idea of talking about new buzzwords after we worked so hard to make the UX-word known and (partially) understood. At least in germany we just reached the point when we dont need to explain the termin every time we use it. Only every third time or so
. But anyway I notice people start thinking about new terms like persuasive design and stuff which really doesnt help establishing a concrete picture in everyones mind about UX.
The hard thing indeed is now, as andrew commented (http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2010/03/01/product-experience-goes-beyond-user-experience/#comment-181090), to continue defining the details of UX so that eveyone understands that it is not about UI odr usability only but more…
But then again the post title should be “UX is more than UI” oder “UX is product experience and more” or…
March 16th, 2010 at 3:09 am
Why I keep thinking of user interface when I’m reading the post? But again you’re right, expanding the scope of it is more important. We should look beyond what is in front of our eyes. Not easy though with the say we have been taught and all…
April 6th, 2010 at 5:03 am
[...] adaptive path » blog » Andrew Crow » A product’s experience goes beyond User… [...]