Designing for Experience

While reading a fine article over at BrandWeek I noticed this:

Similarly,  Tim Leberecht, vp of marketing and communications at Frog Design, San Francisco, said he believed there was nothing new about DT. “Doing in-depth research, that’s what marketers have done for decades,” he said. Leberecht conceded that having customers along for the ride during the creative process  is new, but is more the result of the craze over crowdsourcing than for DT, per se.

DT in this context is Design Thinking of course.  This is an interesting concept.  Predictably I don’t have enough time to go back and do the historical research and say whether he Tim is right or not, I don’t think, however that what he refers to as having customers along for the the ride is as trivial a difference as he seems to think.  He attributes this to the craze over crowdsourcing.  I assume he means that this is a fad, just one that will go away like any other fad.

I do not think that the human-centered ethos that design thinking brings with it is a mere triviality.  I think it is important, and will in fact prove to be the key differentiator in terms of results and value both economic and human.

Economic value: Market research HAS been around for ages and best practices are widely available and are usually instituted leaving little differentiation.  DT can differentiate an organization that uses it internally by creating a better working environment, and can differentiate products and services by creating things that fit with human needs and that are beautiful.

Human Value: Market research is oriented towards seeing a hole in a marketplace, see where opportunity is, and to use the most common parlance “make people want to buy stuff” perhaps stuff they don’t even really need.  Design Thinking on the other hand is steeped in a human-centered ethos that creates stuff that fits a need, and in my opinion, fits the needs of humanity/society.  Many designers are creating products, services, and accompanying systems that are green or sustainable (no I’m not going to unpack that loaded term) so that while they make things that are great for individuals, they are also making things that are good for everyone too.  This is a great example of a human value that DT can bring to the marketplace, not because it’s popular, but because it’s the right thing to do and people want to do, they just don’t have good ways to do it.

OK so maybe I got a little bit on my soap box, but I think my point came through.

I have been enjoying the various comments and critiques on the democratic process on the transforming transformation discussion group we just went through here in the United States, and it is clear that we need to have a better way of doing things.  I frame the problem as confusing voting mechanisms, whether it be paper ballots that are hard to understand, or “touchy” touch screen, or electronic voting that mimics bad paper ballots things need to change.

Some have suggested that there be a national standard ballot and that local issues be ballotted separately, but of course many people feel like this is taking away power from states and local municipalities.  The argument is that “we can’t leave something up to local people who may screw it up” or worse yet “let someone like (the now infamous in some places) Susan Harris manipulate it.”  While I will say that I do know that there is some very limited manipulation that goes on in some places I don’t believe it is a wide spread problem.  I am a little repulsed by the notion that the huge lumbering giant that is the federal government could possibly do a better job, and that it must assume control from the people.  I find it somewhat undemocratic to think that, maybe my faith in humanity is misplaced.  I DO think that perhaps a hyrid approach is called for.

Let’s build on the fine work that has already been done on how to design ballots (it has been pointed out that there have already been some studies on this) and make it even better.  Let’s make this a standard that is at least somewhat flexible that must be followed on the local level.  Local municipalities still retain all control over the process, but what the ballot, whether paper or otherwise, looks like and how you interact with it is controlled by the design standards set forth.