1  Marko  03 August 2004 18:47

This industry sure is exciting and it even sounds like very attractive job when you hear: “interface designer”. Well, at least in English. In my native language (Croatian — soon we’ll be neighbours, Didier) it would be something like “designer corysnichkog suchelya” which doesn’t sounds good at all, even in my language. And here in Croatia most people even wouldn’t know what that actually is.

There again “I Design That Stuff” is much more understandable to ordinary people (at least, every now and then some movie-cop tells that sentence), but for industry professionals i guess it’s too general decription.

I think we have to decide what is a purpose of this namings—is it to impress our clients or to clearly define what each of us do specifically.

2  Craig Davey  03 August 2004 19:19

Jeff Raskin’s The Humane Interface would be a good addition to your book list.

3  Brad Lauster  03 August 2004 19:22

Sorry, but I’m going to nit pick. When you say you can’t design happiness, satisfaction or frustration, you’re talking about not being able to design emotions, and I agree. We can’t design emotions. I also agree that experiences are tied to emotions in that our emotions are the manifestation of our experiences. But dismissing experience design because we can’t design emotions seems unsound. An experience is not equivalent to an emotion, nor is there even a 1:1 relationship between the two.

Now, I’m not saying that experiences can be designed. Lately, my position on whether we can or can not design an experience vacillates daily. The more I read about neuroscience, the more I think we can design an experience….but I digress.

My point here is not to argue for what it should be called, but to help us make sure that, in this time of definition, we are clear with our words.

4  Gabriel Mihalache  03 August 2004 21:14

I think that most of the titles going around are not reflecting the artistical side of the job enough. I’m a programmer so I can first hand appreciate the requirements of talent, taste and coordination which are more important than standards, coding, usability principles, etc. Only because an artist does commercial or industrial design, it doesn’t mean it’s not a form of art.

P.S. I *love* the new background pattern. Very “rich and shameless”, if I may.

5  Marius van Dam  05 August 2004 18:47

Two years ago Adam Greenfield published an interview with Nathan Shedroff about the level in which experience is designable. (as you probably know, the author of the book Experience Design, and also doing something at Ivrea intitute.)

That interview was after we discusded on a forum, in which Adam formulated it something like this (that site is down) : “the human experience is not designable, but it is locally constrainable by design.”

I believe this to be true.

6  helen  01 September 2004 06:58

I have just read a great deal of interesying thoughts. Thanks to whoever has started this entry. But I do argue that a talented designer CAN and MUST be able to design happiness, frustration and so on… not only influence it. Helen, web designer

7  JDenny  10 September 2004 02:21

To be honest I don’t think there’s much point in using the word ‘design’ when its meaning is believed to be something completely different from one person to the next.

“I design that stuff”

Yeah I know its supposed to be an ironic description, but assuming ‘that stuff’ was defined, design is still open to interpretation. Most poeple seem to think it is the creation of visuals (graphics, etc), but I disagree, I think it is all about solving problems and facilitating real people.

- I don’t have a clue how you would define ‘design’ and even less idea of how my next potential client might!

8  JDenny  10 September 2004 02:23

So I don’t know what you do with/to ‘that stuff’ and my clients don’t (before I can explain it) know what I do either.

9  Matt Eliot  09 November 2004 03:20

Can we design experiences? My answer is absolutely yes. Can we guarantee that all participants will have the *same* experience? Absolutely not. How can both be true?

Humans are, by their nature, influenced strongly by their environment. The human factors literature is filled with research on the effect of color, light levels, sound, etc. on external behavior and subjective experience. A perfect example here are the Las Vegas casinos, which are totally designed to influence both experience and behavior. Now, personally, they are headache inducing. Can’t stand ‘em. But let’s save that point for later.

In addition, we all exist in a matrix of associated meaning, having lived in a sea of advertising, educational beliefs, word of mouth, and mediated information services. We are constantly being prepared to have certain responses, whether they are behaviors or emotional states. And much of the current approach to mainstream marketing is to bridge the emotional and the behavioral. By linking emotional states with products or services, advertisers are continually reinforcing the potential for positive experience with product or service use (or unwanted experiences with non-use.)

And the examples of experience design around us are endless:

1) Political propaganda. Much of the advertising in this last presidential election was designed to create an association between the candidate and a subjective experience of trust or safety or caring.

2) Disneyland and Disneyworld. Here’s a place that is totally based in experience design. They’ve literally spent billions on creating a physical environment that evokes a wide spectrum of positive experiences for a significant part of the population. And, through promotion, preparing people to have a good time in advance. An interesting side note on their advertising campaign. You no longer see people just laughing and having a good time. Instead, you see families having *meaningful* interactions. Fascinating.

3) Those trashy little robot toys, like the dancing Santa one can purchase for $15 at the local K-mart. These objects have little observable value. They are not aesthetically pleasing. They perform no practical function. But they charm some people laugh or make them laugh. Enough people to bankroll the company to produce a new version the next year.

Experience design is everywhere. But not everyone will buy into the designer/developer’s vision of the experience they are trying to design for. Personally, the Bush propaganda (and sometimes the Kerry propaganda) made me turn the TV off. I’ve had a lousy time at Disneyland. And if someone gave me one of those dancing Santa’s I’d like nothing better than jumping up and down on it. I was either not in the mood, or not practicing the “willing suspension of disbelief” required to for immersion into the pre-designed experience.

So, can we design experiences? Absolutely. By taking advantage of the “naturally occurring” potential that has already been created by cultural forces and through previous experiences with similar products. By understanding that the people who want the kind of experience you are offering will naturally be attracted to your product and *want* to immerse themselves in your experience. And by realizing that not everyone will immerse themselves in your experience in the same way.

Personally, I think the question of whether we can design another person’s subjective experience is moot. When I am describing my last vacation to you, waxing poetically about the palm trees and the sunsets, I am attempting to create in you an experience with my words, intonation, geatures, etc. We are constantly creating experiences for others. Experience design in the digital realm is simply a recognition of a very human trait.

Ciao,

Matt

PS, And aren’t usability processes simply trying to create products that give folks an experience of ease of use? That sounds like an experience to me. : )

10  britney spears lyrics  26 September 2005 02:23

britney spears nude

11  bangmatch  09 October 2005 05:17

bangmatch |