[Extremedev-research] Fwd: User Interface Design Newsletter - November, 2007

[Geraldo N. <ger...@gm...>]

olhem com carinho, a eng. de fatores humanos =E9 uma arte
inesplorada, mas muito capaz, ie:
msgs subliminares, est=E3o intimamente ligadas aos v=E1rios
fatores humanos...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Human Factors International <hf...@ma...>
Date: 27 Nov 2007 13:07
Subject: User Interface Design Newsletter - November, 2007
To: ger...@gm...



User Interface Design Update Newsletter - November, 2007

_________________________________________________

Each month HFI reviews the most useful developments in UI research
from major conferences and publications.

View in HTML - http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/nov07.asp

__________________________________________________

In this issue:

HFI's Chief Scientist, Kath Straub, PhD, CUA, looks at the gap between
what researchers study and what practitioners want -- and the gap
between what practitioners present and what clients want to hear.

The Pragmatic Ergonomist, HFI's CEO Dr. Eric Schaffer, gives practical advi=
ce.

__________________________________________________

META-USABILITY: WHEN THE METHOD IS NOT THE MESSAGE

INTO THE ABYSS...

Every year about this time we update HFI's Putting Research Into
Practice course. And every year about this time we find ourselves
faced with the same challenge -- how can we effectively bridge the gap
between what researchers study and what practitioners want to know.

Actually it's not just a gap that separates what (most) researchers
study at and what most practitioners want...it's more like an abyss.

PRACTITIONERS, LIKE USERS, WANT IT TO BE EASY

Practitioners want research to solve a problem, or justify a specific
design or business decision.

 - Where should this button go?
 - What research method should I use?
 - What color should this box be?
 - What is the best label for...?
 - How many participants do I need to test... really?
 - What should I read / study / learn to become a better practitioner?

The most ruthless practitioners think of research as useful when it is
essentially a set of bake-offs.

Researchers tend to think more broadly, focusing on abstract questions
that seek to describe the system and the variables that work within
it. The answers to questions that researchers explore is often neither
immediate nor concrete:

 - How can I extend the GOMS model to accommodate... X?
 - What is the role of personality in risk assessment that influences
likelihood to convert?

There is a necessary connection between theory and practice. But there
is also a difference between the two. And that difference, as van de
Snepscheut said, is larger in practice than it is in theory.

DETAILS, DETAILS

To be fair, research papers are not really written for practitioners.
They are peer-to-peer conversations amongst researchers. Researchers
and practitioners have different information needs and goals. And this
mismatch makes the literature essentially unusable for practitioners.
Details that are keenly relevant to researchers are just details to
practitioners. There is too much work involved to make the leap from
research to reality. Even industry leaders indicate that research is
often unengaging -- "I would probably rather curl up with a good
detective story than with a bad research paper. OK, I would rather
read any detective story than nearly any research paper." (Jarrett,
Journal of Usability Studies, 2007)

It seems fair to say that researchers and practitioners are different
user groups with different tasks and different objectives. Researchers
want to know (and, as such, their papers convey) the logic driving to
the method and the analysis driving to the conclusion. Practitioners
just want to know the conclusion and how it solves a problem in their
world. Today.

Take a step back.
Have you ever sat through a usability testing presentation where the
first third of the presentation is spent (re)selling usability and
setting up the project, covering the details of the methods, data
collection approaches? Where the first actual findings come 20 minutes
into the presentation? Where the design recommendations come later?
And where the prioritized solutions are on the last slide? Kinda
ironic, don'tcha think...?

PRACTITIONER, HEAR THYSELF

Cooke and Mings (2005) observed this gap between the approach and
focus that practitioners have, and the answers that the industry wants
and needs. To gain an understanding of how to close the gap, they
conducted in-depth interviews with (non-usability) professionals
involved in product design, development and documentation lifecycles
at a major software organization.

As should be expected, they found that individuals who focus on
usability tend to focus on... details of usability. While the details
are important, and knowledge of (benefits of) methods are core skills,
conveying the findings -- better yet, the solution -- rather than the
analysis leading to the selection of a method is really what clients
are looking for. Based on their research, the authors identified key
skills that drive UX success in the "real world."

 - Effective practitioners need to be able to identify, diagnose and
   execute a correct solution quickly.
 - Practitioners need to know which methods are out there and when
   to apply which, and just do it.
 - Practitioners should be able to articulate the tradeoffs for favoring
   a specific method based on the business perspective. This means
   balancing the quality of the data against constraints like:
    - How much will the various approaches cost to deploy?
    - Which is fastest given our current state?
    - Which is the most powerful but least expensive data we
       can get to make the case (e.g., quantitative, qualitative)
 - Practitioners need to provide concrete recommendations, not
   problems and findings. And the earlier the recommendations
   come, the better.
- Conversely, practitioners need to set up and provide longitudinal
   metrics on how a product or interface fares over subsequent
   updates and releases.

WHAT YOUR LISTENERS WANT TO HEAR...?

Finally, Ming and Cooke note that practitioners need to sell in
business terms. They suggest that practitioners (and training
programs) should hone negotiation and audience monitoring skills, and
the ability to recognize when there is a gap between what is being
presented and what the audience is seeking. After all, the business
wants answers: What do we do? How to do it? What is the projected
business impact (ROI) of making such changes? They aren't always as
interested in the method and data that lead up to that solution.

Such a cut-past-the-chase approach can be difficult for practitioners.
The chase is the fun part, right? And, the answers the business guys
want ARE in the presentations.

But from business guys' perspective, there are all those other details
to wade (wait?) through... Why that method?... What are the logical
steps for driving from data to recommendation?... Presentations seem
designed for like-minded peers, not the intended end users.

Sound familiar? Back to reading research papers, so we can give you
what you want...

References for this newsletter are posted at:
http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/nov07.asp

__________________________________________________

The Pragmatic Ergonomist, Dr. Eric Schaffer

Our details are dangerous. They can lead us to focus on design issues,
while missing the large strategic issues where user-experience
analysis can make the greatest contribution. Our details can also make
our presentations lose the interest of our executive sponsors and
clients.

But as professionals we MUST keep up on the literature. We need the
research to guide us. We also need to provide the citations that
quickly and cheaply prove our point. So Kath, back to your work on the
2008 Putting Research into Practice course.

__________________________________________________

HFI IS HIRING:
Many positions available at HFI
http://www.humanfactors.com/about/employment.asp

__________________________________________________

Putting Research into Practice - our annually-presented seminar on
recent research and its practical application.
http://www.humanfactors.com/training/annualupdate.asp.

HFI's training schedule:
http://www.humanfactors.com/training/schedule.asp

__________________________________________________

Suggestions, comments, questions?
HFI editors at mailto:hf...@hu....

Want past issues? http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/pastissues.asp

Subscribe? - http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/subscribe.asp

_____________________________________
Do NOT want this newsletter?
http://www.humanfactors.com/unsubscribe.asp?Ema...@gm...
or copy the above URL into the address line of your browser and hit return.






--=20
site: http://extremedev.sf.net
msn: geraldo_boca_at_hotmail.com
skype: geraldo-netto
icq: 145-061-456