Category: General Stuff

Conversations, engagements and embodiments. Let me explain further…

Conversations are central to what we do as interaction designers: staging necessary and significant dialogues with the stakeholders & teammates as well as with the product’s users via the “It” that is being designed (an interface, a piece of software, a mobile device, a branded service, an organizational system, etc.). That thing is the mediator of a behavioral relationship between people, a conveyance of social/philo/political/emotional values via the visual, structural, and behavioral facets of the “It”. Conversations, especially those truly memorable, rewarding and influential ones, are framed by a narrative or story that adds rich context, and thus helping to create valuable, and hopefully enduring, meaning. As interaction designers we define behavior, and shape meaning. Conversations serve as the vehicle for that to happen, which are mediated by artifacts and outputs we may create.

Engagements are the product encounters themselves, the actual using of “It” to act in some way or achieve a goal or perform a task, etc. I use this word engagement in particular because it suggests something deep, committed, profound, and very significant personally, like a wedding engagement. As you play around with a product, feeling out the controls and responses, interpreting what does what and for whatever reason, you are cultivating a relationship, in effect “getting to know each other” seeing if there’s a good fit, an appropriateness for the immediate situation. And all of this–here’s the magic, the real phenomenal beauty of it–transpires literally in just seconds through the powerful neuro/physio/cognitive abilities of our minds and bodies and senses.

Embodiments are the manifestations of a designer’s ideas into some perceptible form that can be engaged with on various levels, thus enabling the rich meaningful storied conversation to happen, and hopefully cultivate a shift in that person’s attitudes and behaviors for the better– a renewed outlook, a completed task, a sense of accomplishment, whatever it may be. The embodiment can be an interface, a kiosk, a mobile device, a wayfinding system, a set of packaging, blueprint for a new service, etc. The blend of visual (graphics, icons, colors, textures), behavioral (type, click, flick, rotate, twist, drag, shake, speak, etc.) and structural (navigation, orientation, semantics, etc.) takes shape in the embodiment and basically constitutes the “It” to contend with, and how meaning emerges, via the “consummate doing and undergoings”, as John Dewey would say. (riffing from Dewey’s Art as Experience)

---

So if we accept that IxD is deep down about these three fundamental, core elements then I think we can have very productive debates about the future of IxD and its applicability in other areas such as services, policies, social change, ecological well-being, thus identifying new areas of opportunity for the skilled, talented, well-intentioned interaction designer.

First it was interaction design. Then service design. What’s the next hot thing for design? Policy Design. (that’s my big gamble :-)

The latest firestorm over Facebook’s privacy and content usage policies indicated that this notion of crafting a community policy is more than simply the work of a few lawyers and a PR campaign to “sell it” to the skeptical public. Their new attempt to “democratize” their efforts with blogs and commenting could indicate the shift to a new approach on debates about corporate policies and how they should be expressed and governed.

Then there are the mundane tax policies not just written into the code of popular consumer software like TurboTax but governing consumer and corporate behaviors, subscription plans/policies for mobile phone use, zoning regulations for doing home modifications on your property, policies on your home/car/college loans for re-payment and re-financiing, etc. Policies are a fact of life that we deal with whether we like it or not, however implicitly or explicitly–or even unknowingly.

And there’s the new Obama budget plan and his recent speech to Congress heavily suggesting that regulatory policies are making a comeback for the financial industries. Agencies to authorize and shepherd or oversee the distribution of the stimulus funds. Bodies to ensure dutiful and not wasteful expenditures, amid the banner of a new era of responsibility, as hailed in Obama’s inaugural address.

But who’s going to do draft, maintain, communicate, and evolve these policies–which are regarded in effect as large abstract incomprehensible documents full of jargon and projecting an inhuman disregard for ordinary common sense. More than likely it will be those who have an enlightened sense for the humane, sensible, communicable, visualizable, etc. and not just the typical lawyer or politician or bureaucrat.

Yep, we’re moving up Buchanan’s four orders trajectory towards ever-increasing levels of political and social complexity, or wickedness. Where rhetorical powers of negotiation and arbitration become critical, with a primacy on truly knowing your audience and balancing the maelstrom of competing interests and rights and responsibilities among all the power players. Influence is wide-reaching, across the internets (sic) and mobile devices and third places or even geographies.

But will these people who perform “policy design” be called designers? Probably not, more likely just strategists, planners, facilitators, etc. which is fine as long as they positively convey the humanistic and cultural values of “good design”, and embody/express them into their practice and the subsequent artifacts… effectively becoming the arbiters of policy-making in government, business, law, universities, among other institutions of daily life.

I wrote about simplicity last year in a posting based upon Paul Rand’s famous dictum: Simplicity is not the goal. It is the by-product of a good idea and modest expectations. I certainly believe Rand’s point still holds, but I’ve been drawn to this concept again, to unpack it further, more deeply as a rhetorical and humanistic, cultural issue of interaction design a la Buchanan/McCullough, etc.

At Interaction’09 in Vancouver, Dan Saffer almost exasperatedly admonished the audience to “stop fetishizing simplicity”, which partly explains why this concept has returned to my attention recently. What is simplicity really? Below are some early thoughts as I brainstorm on this topic:

– Simplicity innately has to deal with designing for rapid and facile sensemaking–the interpretation of meaning– which may lead to the generation of meaning in the engagement between a person and a product/service/system, which itself is heavily contextualized

– The presence of simplicity emerges in the course of a dialogue (visual, conceptual, physical, etc.) a flow of meaning from person to “the other”–whatever it may be

– There is a social or cultural dimension to the usage of products and services, call it brand-driven pressure or acceptance that makes something seem simple or assume the mantle of simplicity (ie, Apple products are branded as simple, easy to use…but in fact they’re quite complex, filled with hidden features, etc.)

– At a deep human level, I think “simplicity” is really about engendering a profound, instinctive quality of trust in the human user/participant of this product-driven dialogue…Once trust is gained or established, does that make the product seem simpler to operate?

– Following from ideas by Daniel Pink in his book on right-brained thinking, I wonder if stories, empathy, imagination, and a plain old common sense way of supporting people in their everyday activities cultivate a sense of simplicity?

I intend to explore this further with a former Adobe design colleague, and hopefully our discussions will result in a provocative and significant contribution to the design profession, in ACM Interactions namely :-) Stay tuned!

Good, now I don’t have write a summary :-) Just kidding… Will get to it soon, just plowing through some client projects/deadlines lately. But for now, here’s Core77’s lovely write-ups–Enjoy!

http://www.core77.com/blog/events/interaction_09_all_posts_in_one_place_12614.asp

// Just a quick note //

Wow I thought this was really neat: three major keynotes from John Thackara, Marc Rettig, and Robert Fabricant, who each in their own way addressed issues of designing for “sustainability”.

Thackara started off a bit dour, with somber overviews of the various “grim peaks”, challenges of water, energy, health, pollution, warming, etc. aaah!! world collapse, etc. But led to a grand view of design “saving the world” so to speak. Spoke in rather lofty, broad strokes of design goodness, kinda abstract, unfulfilling sense of optimism, felt very grand and idealistic, reminded me of Bauhaus or De Stijl philosophical aims…Good conversation starter!

Fabricant from frog delivered an amazing keynote, hit all the right points, including an emotionally compelling story of designing for HIV testing in South Africa, really brought tangible closure to “social change” design challenges, by showing the physical results that were created, a real test kit for men to self-test HIV, and the humbling social/family repercussions. Truly profound and eloquently presented. A powerful speaker and just a great example of design for social good. Sign me up!!

(Slides are here)

(Here’s Fabricant’s own thoughts about the conference here)

Rettig offered an amusing and emotionally heartfelt personal story of his own journey as a designer and evolution of his firm, Fit Associates, around various social-personal problems around “sleep apnea”, as a personal vision/path. Found it quite moving and powerful for those at a career crossroads, like myself who seek something “more” than just fixing a user interface or making a bunch of wireframes. Seeking a path towards meaningful change by truly deeply madly understanding people’s behavior, life even, and figuring out ways to support and enhance their behavior. Offered various sites and names of groups/teams/people doing social change, to encourage involvement and participation. Will post list soon!