Design adds greater value in the long term by being applied to the HOW of business (practices and process), whereas being applied to the WHAT of business (products) ends up having limited value as those products become commoditized. ~ paraphrasing Clement Mok, March 1st 2005
For an audience who will neither practise the design profession nor tend to apply the user centered design process in their day to day work, what could be the essential takeaway from a day spent immersed in the experience?
Call it experience design, but crafting a workshop for a multi-stakeholder group cannot begin without first identifying what it is we wish for them to experience. I've been mulling this over for the past couple of weeks, ever since the questions were first posed and here's my attempt at articulating the essence of what I believe to be the most important "Aha!" from this exposure.
Human centered: To practise, one must become.
Permit me to circumlocute for a moment in order to articulate this concept with clarity. There are numerous terms that have been applied to the way the producer (the manufacturer or the organization, as the case may be) communicated about their products and services to their target audience - "top down" approach, "push marketing", "mass communications", and of course, advertising. The idea was that you made a widget which you then advertised and promoted heavily in order to sell it to your intended customer base. "The job of advertising is to create a desire". Wants rapidly became confused with needs, and this can be seen everyday in the mainstream consumer culture we are all immersed in.
Begin with the users.
Don Norman wrote the book to advocate user-centered design - a philosophy that things should be designed with the needs and interests of the user in mind, making products that are easy to use and understand.
John Heskett once said that an invention is not an innovation until it is adopted by the users.
Taken together, we find the seeds of the reversal in thinking that leads to a more "bottom up" approach or "pull marketing", to use the vocabulary of the preceding paragraph. That is, one isn't attempting to create demand so much as to identify it and then satisfice it, in a manner that offers value to the end user, thus lowering the barriers to the adoption of your product or service or program.
Value is contextual.
What might make sense for the producers, however, becomes even more challenging to gauge when attempting to provide solutions for end users across the vast gulf of disparities - of income, of socio-economic strata, of geography and culture and language, of experience and mindset, and thus, of values.
Understanding the difference.
Human centered design took the premise that if we were to begin first by understanding our target audience, their environment and challenges, their lives and hopes and wishes and desires, we could identify "unmet needs", or gaps in the system, which offered an opportunity for innovation. New products could be designed to meet these needs, thus offering a value to the customer and differentiating themselves from the competition, considered to be inadequate. This is the central premise of the user centered design approach to solution development.
Respect, empathy, humility.
Thus, we could proffer that the human centered approach puts the intended target audience (the user) as the focal point or the frame of reference by which to assess and evaluate the design, from their perspective. What are their aspirations, dreams, hopes and challenges? What do they want to do? What is the benefit of your product or service or program, in the context of their daily life? Why should they adopt your invention?
We hope to enable a shift from the top down, "we know best for you" approach that characterised the past and closer towards our common humanity where we work together to solve our closely interconnected world's problems.
Yeah, that last is a bit of a stretch but our aspirations must always be just a tad out of our reach no?