I like 7. Distraction detours .. both because it shows when we’re not getting out of the way to let the customers do what they want .. and because of the opposite: when we assume a distraction is unwanted while it might make the experience much better (e.g. if I’m online window shopping and serendipity is important to improve the experience)
As Rory Sutherlands suggests we’ve created this idea that highly rational metrics create good measures of what a good experience is.
e.g. if you want to book a train then there is this assumption that you want to choose based on time and price .. but those are only two options both focused on reducing the experience to as little as possible… Sutherland suggests that these are hardly the only reasons why people ride trains and that we would benefit from better measures more closely connected to why people prefer the train compared to planes or cars. https://youtu.be/Bc9jFbxrkMk?si=zd6XhuTlGb6A0ruW
Love the thinking Helge! I do believe that actually makes a lot of sense, and that it’s something builders are typically going to miss and not consider.
Too many tricky loops that aren’t always intuitive.
The question might be- how do we keep these pitfalls on top of mind?
Using the example of an online website where people would list their houses, but also where other people would go every day to look at houses and sometime, only rarely purchase a house (we have one of them here in Norway). If the measure of success would be only the sale of the house the experience would fail the people who are just there to ‘window shop’ (which I assume are >90% of the visits). The site would need to be able to 1. identify (assume) why people are visiting by analyzing online behavior and 2. Measure the value of the experience based on this assumption.
That is why (I keep nagging about) the need to focus on ‘situations’. Because it’s situations that determine (hold the information about) what people are trying to achieve and value. Neither a focus on people (demographics), nor customers (only one situation) nor users (only use ) help us understand the bigger picture, motivation and desired outcome.
Maybe this is packaged inside something else today (it’s been a while since I worked as a UX’er), but my experience at Merck was that situations held the key to better understand and design experiences
I’m trying to make this into a bigger thing myself as well (also because the data is less intrusive compared to “personal” data which I struggle with seeing being very effective).
Let me try to spin out a post on the form to talk about ‘situations’ more focused