Personally, meaning through my experience with work, school, and reading, I think the user (or customer) is usually correct. It all depends on the case. A designer cannot make every user happy, and if they do not have enough capital or the resources to add features, or if these features contradict other parts of the design then it is illogical to add these because a couple of user's complaints. The amount of time and research and money that goes into adding these features may not be whats best for the design or the company. Also trying to improve the design for some users could make it difficult for others.
In the case of situation-centric approaches to research I think Hoakman wants the designer to put themselves in the situation of the user to see the problems at first hand or being with a user who is using it. He also does not want the characteristics (persona) of other users to have a biased effect, and have the focus be more on a specific area instead of how the user interacts throughout it. I think that in project 2 the use case tackled half this when finding a random user to analyze while they are using the machines. I think that if I would re-do it I would also do a use case with myself along with the other case, because then I would know every thought going through my head for a better understanding of what the errors were. I would also do my case first so I would have more specific questions to ask the user when they get to the situation where the problems occur.
No comments:
Post a Comment