Adaptive Path Blog

This week’s topic for discussion is:

Is “simplicity” a customer-centric philosophy? Does more information on your company’s website help the customer, or does it only serve the needs of the marketing department? When does the value of that information to the customer reach a point of diminishing returns?

Idea suggested by Daniel Szuc. Background and purpose of this series.

In Adaptive Path’s monthly all-hands meetings, we start off with a segment called 5 Minute Madness. This is where anyone can speak up with an idea or question that they’ve been thinking about. It could be unproven, not quite formed, or something that they strongly believe in. It allows us to discuss and agree or disagree with each other in a short timeframe. It’s thought-provoking, challenging and can sometimes lead to spectacular arguments. But the point is that we respect each other’s opinion and know that anything discussed is there for the greater good. It’s been very successful and it got me thinking…

What if we did that with everyone?

So, starting Monday, I’ll be opening up 5 Day Madness on AP’s blog. This is a chance for everyone to discuss ideas, ask questions and challenge beliefs. The topics will range from design and experience, to customer service, business practices, technology, etc. Anything is on the table, provided it gives us as an industry and community the chance to grow from our debate.

The rules are simple: Be respectful of each other and thoughtful in your responses. Know that it’s okay to be wrong, and it’s also okay to agree to disagree. The topics will be posted on Monday and last through Friday. The next Monday starts a new discussion.

Now, I am smart enough to know that I am not smart enough to come up with good topics every week. So, I am opening it up to the floor to submit ideas. You can send them to madness AT adaptivepath DOT com.

I hope this proves to be fun, stimulating and provide growth for us as a community. I’m looking forward to some lively debates!

Today was our first day of in-world interviews with actual Second Life residents. I have to say, it was a lot of fun.

We met with a man who has been in-world for some time now. Like many people, he was passionate about the topic and we were happy to hear him talk.

It was an unusual experience…as was expected. First, how do you meet and greet someone formally in-world? Typically, you’d shake hands if you were meeting in person. At least there is some protocol for talking on the phone. But when you see someone who is there, but not there…what are you supposed to do?

We did what came naturally. We said hello, introduced ourselves and sat down in the plush leather chairs of Linden Labs’ beautiful conference room by the sea. The setting actually affected my mood. The surroundings were done so well and felt real enough to almost feel you were there. All while talking to the interviewee, we were looking at him, and I think that changed the way we spoke.

When you talk on the phone, you can look around, multitask and write notes to the other researchers. But, even though this person could not see us, we unconsciously behaved as if he could.

I did take some liberties and moved the camera’s viewpoint around to take some pictures. Seeing your “self” sitting there while talking with someone is odd, indeed.

It was a great success. The interview was well paced with no technical problems. The different medium by which the interview was conducted had no effect on the quality or possibility of the communication. I enjoyed this more than a regular phone interview!

Chiara will add more as the research process goes on. I just wanted to drop a quick note about how fun and easy it went today.

Dan Saffer wrote an article on innovation for BusinessWeek. Available online (subscription required) and at your local newsstand. (Link goes to paid content area of their site.)

Innovation is traditionally understood as a combination of insight and invention, with insight being the “Aha!” moment and invention being the company’s muscle to make it happen. This is all well and good, but one crucial aspect of the definition is missing: the ability to judge the inspiration and determine whether it is worthwhile to spend the company’s resources on the invention. Without this judgment, innovation is just The New, and new isn’t always better. It’s a louder sizzle, not a juicier steak. For innovation to be truly important, it needs to resonate with consumers. Insights need to be derived from the unmet needs and desires of people, not simply the company’s feeling that it needs to innovate.

The University of Washington is working on a technology to enable sign language communication using mobile phones.

The Wii is a hit in the elderly market. I, for one, welcome our video-bowling grandparent overlords.

Google Apps Premiere Edition launches.

Is it me, or is Second Life getting a lot of press lately? Not that we weren’t interested already.

Jason Kottke lights an elephant in the room on fire. He looks at the gender breakdown of the speakers at recent and upcoming “tech/design/web” conferences.

Brian exorcises his demons on the topic.
And Daring Fireball adds some perspective.

All I know is our phones have been twittering all afternoon.

Cisco and Apple called to say i love you.

Nintendo could teach the world a thing or two about customer service! Awesome.
Speaking of customer service…

One of the first things many people do when establishing themselves in Second Life is to customize their appearance.

You’re not told to, though there are hints given on how to go about doing it. But there is this compelling need to make yourself look different than the stock avatar.

My original intention was to modify my avatar to look as close to me as possible. I figured, since I am here for business, I need to be presentable. How many residents will want to be interviewed if I have dragon wings, tight vinyl pants and star bursts floating above my head? (Um…that was a little too telling about myself…I’ve said too much.)

So, I customized my appearance with brown hair, hazel eyes, a dazzling smile and some freckles. Then I started to dress myself. Here’s where it got uncomfortable. I immediately did the things that any fashion-concious person with odd physical traits does, I looked for ways to hide things through color, clothing length and style. For those that know me, I am obnoxiously tall. I’ve been tall since I was a kid and had to endure all the things that come with it -– buying XL clothing, long lanky legs, standing out in the crowd. So in Second Life, I started to look at dark clothing, low waisted shirts, matte finished shoes that didn’t call attention to my clown feet, and so on.

And then I realized something…I’m in Second Life! I don’t have to be 5′ 17″ anymore. I can be normal height, wear normal clothes, not stand out from the crowd! I can be the ideal “me” or I could change my appearance to suit the situation. So, now I have my “dragon wing, pink haired, tattooed self” for hanging out with friends. And I have my more buttoned up, researcher look for the in-world work.

The International Atomic Energy Agency released a new warning symbol that is meant to supplement the existing trefoil radiation logo.

The reason behind the IAEA’s decision to develop a new logo is based on an identified need for informing people who are dangerously close to a radiation source. This could be people who are working on machines that have radioactive material within, or people who stumble upon a container of a potential lethal does of radiation.

I’ll admit I was skeptical about the need for an additional emblem. Who doesn’t know the trefoil design and become afraid of the potential of a dangerous situation? However, according to Carolyn MacKenzie of the IAEA, there is a difference between getting close to radiation and that of becoming exposed to a source that will kill you.

So, reasons for it’s justification aside, let’s get to the real issue of the symbol….the design sucks.

First, let’s hear about the research they did regarding the design:

The new symbol is aimed at alerting anyone, anywhere to the potential dangers of being close to a large source of ionizing radiation, the result of a five-year project conducted in 11 countries around the world. The symbol was tested with different population groups — mixed ages, varying educational backgrounds, male and female — to ensure that its message of “danger — stay away” was crystal clear and understood by all.

Carolyn states that the color red was identified as a “danger” color, much more formidable than the yellow trefoil palette. Okay, I’ll give her that. She then goes on to say that the trefoil reminded the test group of a propeller and that might not convey the correct message.

So why, then, use that same propeller in the new symbol?

What they are trying to do is indicate that something (radiation) is coming at you that can cause death and therefore you should run away. No doubt this is an important and difficult message to convey.

The people who developed the new symbol are described as “human factor experts, graphic artists, and radiation protection experts.” It was tested by “the Gallup Institute on a total of 1,650 individuals.”

I think they got exactly what they tried to get — a symbol that was designed by committee.

This has got to be one of the worst attempts at symbolic design ever. There are literally five things conveyed in this symbol — a radioactive source, radiation, death, a person, and movement. So many points to communicate in what is obviously a very critical amount of time. It’s simply overdesigned and trying to do too much in the small space available.

Imagine if the AIGA redesigned it’s basic logo for taxi. Instead of a silhouette of a cab, we’d have a running pictogram of a person getting into the cab, driving to it’s destination and then paying for the services. Or, if the Stop sign now included a picture of a car in motion, a car breaking and stopping and then a potential car crash if the driver does not head the warning.

There is elegance in simplicity. There is svelteness in the obvious. In trying to be a safety symbol that conveys everything to everyone, they’ve created a symbol of confusion, over-thought and complexity.

Sources:
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2007/radiationsymbol.html
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Multimedia/Videos/NewRadiationSymbol/index.html
http://www.orau.org/ptp/articlesstories/radwarnsymbstory.htm

A very interesting opportunity recently presented itself to us. Linden Labs, the creators of Second Life, called with a question about how they can improve certain aspects of the “in-world” experience.

Quite a few of us have experience in online and console worlds, so this is a pretty exciting opportunity. We knew that there were plenty of dedicated residents out there who have strong opinions about the world they live in. We also knew that working with the people at Linden would be a lot of fun and a unique experience.

So, after we spoke with them for a while, we discovered that, while there may be a few issues with the world and it’s amazing growth rate, there is one issue in particular that’s affecting the usability for the residents. While I can’t divulge the exact issue, I can say that it’s a very complex and interesting problem -– something that we’ve not tackled in this manner before.

While Adaptive Path doesn’t have a prescribed set of generic tasks that are applied to every project, there are a certain amount of given generalities that frame an approach. Start with research and discovery, move to analysis, prototype and test, then build.

At least, that’s how we’d do it in the real world…

But this is Second Life, the three-dimensional, online world which is “imagined created and owned by its residents”. This is not some lab where we could watch behind a double mirror, or a website where we could begin with remote research screening. These were people, but in a different place and, quite literally, a different world.

So, how do we approach this project? Well, since our users are residents in this world, we think it will be good to work with them in-world. Speak with them in the environment in which they live. Ask questions and do research totally immersed in the surroundings that they care about and work hard at creating and maintaining.

This is going to be different for us…and for Linden Labs. We’re going to be blogging about this on a near daily level. We want to try this experiment and immerse you in the project with us as well. We’ll talk as much as we can about the problems we’re working on, but also explain how we’re altering our techniques to match those of a different playing field. You’ll hear about the successes and failures and watch as we conduct this project out in the open.

It’s going to be an interesting and very exciting project for us. Stay tuned!

Fo those interested in Second Life, check out www.secondlife.com. You can download the client, sign up for an account and join us and over 3.6 million other residents right now.

To find us, look for me (Andrew Ophelia), Chiara (Andromache Ayers) and Brian (Ciardan Flanagan) and come say hi!

Adaptive Path now has our very own Twitter page. If you’re a fan of the blog, and you want to follow some of our day-to-day adventures, add “adaptivepath” to your Twitter friend list.

Or visit us at http://www.twitter.com/adaptivepath.

Let us know who you are and we’ll follow you, too!

I had almost forgotten how beautiful libraries can be. It seems like the modern day library is either Barnes & Noble or Borders. It would be nice to experience the solace maze of the stacks again.

These images are beautiful and are from a book of photographs by Candida Höfer entitled, Libraries.

More here.