I do believe the user is correct, however I also think that phrase was created in reference to a unique user for a unique design. In most scenarios, there are numerous users with numerous demands. A user doesn't necessarily understand every aspect of a product or intent of its design. A user would not know the needs of every other user, in fact a designer would probably have a better idea of who their patrons are. If a user is complaining or requesting change I would assume they are not understanding a feature of the product, the lack of understanding could in many ways be a legitimate reason to change the product or feature. I don't think a designer should always provide new features simply because a user asked for it. I do believe that if a user has brought up a concern it is worth investigating no matter how menial it may be.
The user centered focus Hoekman advocates has to do with persona. He mentions how a user-centered approach is not always best for the user's experience. As I was mentioning in my response, users simply do not always know what's best for their needs as a user.
counter to the User-centered report, Hoekman refers to the situation-centered approach. He explains that it is much broader and easier to apply to a design, instead of focusing on who you are creating it for you, focus on the very basic tasks and making those tasks most accessible. In Project 2 we looked at the design of an elliptical's interface, had we looked at the independent tasks as opposed to larger goals I think we may have understood the basic issues with its design sooner. the best method for that project would probably be the situation-centered approach because of its broad user base. Someone who uses an elliptical should not have to fit a persona to use the machine the same way a persona could be used on a sporting goods website.
Hi Zach,
ReplyDeleteYour post hits on many of the key ideas in this chapter, and the ones you include, you have a good understanding of. However, your post is missing some of the most essential ideas. I think your post would be strengthened a lot if you went back and looked at Chapter 3 more carefully and included more references to it, since about half of the chapter's big ideas are missing. For example, you could include some of the methods for doing situation-centered design and talk about how you could have applied those to your usability test. Feel free to extend on your thoughts in the comments, and I'll get back to you and include the second post in the grade as well.