(or, an I-haven’t-fallen-off-the-twig post)

Recently I had to put a major freelance project on the backburner because I needed to care for a sick relative. Three weeks ago, I was making funeral arrangements. I kept in touch with my client, and through email, phone and text messaging, we managed to devise a strategy to redesign a fairly large site. Nevertheless, I felt guilty for not contributing more to the project, and for not completing it in the time frame we had initially agreed upon.

My client said not to worry about it, and to do what I have to do. “Without friends and family, you’re nothing.”

This one statement is comforting and insightful. It’s wonderful to work with a client who doesn’t view me as a cog in the machine, but as a multidimensional person.

Recenty a patron at the library was having trouble sending an e-mail inquiry to the Smithsonian Institute’s National Museum of Natural History. She couldn’t copy and paste the address into her e-mail because the address links are written without using the “@” symbol, so as to curb spam. (Clicking on the links opens up Microsoft Outlook.)

Seriously, who does this anymore?

What struck me as odd about their contact page is that it’s a slush pile of email addresses. A better idea would be to create a contact form with a drop down menu so messages can be routed accordingly. This is a glaring flaw in an otherwise impressive site.

And it’s interesting to note that “if you have no idea where to send your inquiry,” just send it to the webmaster. Having a contact form would sure make his/her job easier.

This incident has inspired me to begin rounding up examples of “Bad UX”, online as well as in real life. Watch for more to come!

Thanks to everyone for their input about the UX deliverables workshop! Mike and I had a discussion yesterday (over a delicious bento lunch in the city) that we should hold off on the workshop for now. Instead, we want to focus on a more immediate need of beginning designers who need an environment where they can learn from others, encourage each other and grow their portfolios.

One idea I received via email came from someone who wants to have his portfolio critiqued as he’s building it. This in turn gave way to the idea of local designers having meetups – a mini UX show and tell, as it were. It doesn’t have to be some major event like the ones Philly CHI hosts. It can be as simple as a few designers sitting at a table at a local coffeehouse sharing their work. Having these gatherings every other week would allow for consistency as well as flexibility. It’s also a great way to get to know local designers in the area and network with each other. And perhaps it can be a soapbox for beginners to vent about their struggle to find work (kept to a minimum, of course. This is meant to be a positive environment where we can encourage and support each other!)

Would you be interested in having this kind of UX meetup in your area?

So I made an impromptu presentation of my UX presentation idea at the PhillyCHI UX Show and Tell last night. It was received positively, but from the feedback I received, I realize that there are a lot more kinks to work out than I initially thought. Among other things to be reconsidered:

Target audience – should this be for people who are looking to beef up their portfolios a bit more, or for people who don’t have any previous UX work to show?

Backgrounds of target audience – while I had initially had in mind people coming from different fields and into UX, it didn’t occur to me that this in itself could be a problem. Someone coming into UX from an artist background is going to have a different frame of reference from someone coming from a computer science background. This could make things tricky.

Semantics – should this be called a “workshop” or an “interactive session?”

I was also considering integrating a panel on how to effectively present deliverables, how to cope with tough clients, what to do when there’s an objection to your design, etc. But I think this may be best kept separate; nevertheless, it’s still something I’m interested in (just gotta make sure it hasn’t already been done…I hope it hasn’t!)

There’s much to be discussed and mused over with the PhillyCHI chair, Mike Carvin. In the meantime, if you have any ideas or suggestions on how to make this project a reality, please leave a comment or email me: mortvia at gmail dot com.

The white sheet of paper torn from a sketchbook can be just as intimidating as the blank screen. It reminds me of my creative writing class back in college. While other students could write gobs of pages that needed to be thinned out, my writing was anorexic and in need of fattening up. The internal organizer and perfectionist in me can’t stand messiness.

It is possible to have UX block? Perhaps. But just like writer’s block, we need to remind ourselves that this isn’t Rocket Surgery™. And even when it feels that way, there’s a book for that.

“Sketching wireframes by hand is like writing the shitty first drafts of a story.”

When you have an assignment or an idea for a wireframe, it’s actually not ideal to head straight for Visio, Omnigraffle, Balsamiq, or whatever tool you use. Ideas that go straight from your head to the wireframing program are less malleable, and it may make you less inclined to make needed changes due to all the time you spent sitting at the computer. Using paper and a pen or pencil is much more liberating. It may help to think of sketching along these lines: Sketching wireframes by hand is like writing the shitty first drafts of a story. (Even if you’re not a writer, Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird is an excellent book.) The sketching stage where you want to make your mistakes and get all the kinks out. The last thing you want is a major gaff to patch up at, say, the prototyping stage.

You have to keep yourself and your deliverables pliable to mold into the shape you need in any given situation. Now’s the time to step away from the comp, tear out that blank sheet – unless it’s a pricey Moleskine – and scribble away, even when your internal organizer is cringing. Doing so will make you more proficient, and your deliverables will get better.

Inspiration can – and should – come from sources outside of UX. Recently, some movies have caught my eye in this regard, and I’m writing a mini-review of one of them.

Not only is this just a good movie, period, but it gives good insight into how Chanel became the brilliant designer that she was (having Audrey Tatou as the lead role certainly helped in this regard!) Here are some things that came to mind that may be of help to beginning UX designers:

Be observant in everyday life: Chanel observed people intensely. She noted details in clothing such as color and shape. These would eventually become part of her own designs.

Aim for simplicity: you can see from her clothing in the early days how Chanel embraced androgyny when women were still squeezing themselves into corsets. Later, she made suits that move with the body, not the opposite.

Get a mentor: you don’t have to be a courtesan, but it will definitely help to have a mentor who can help you improve your designs and build up your skills, and can introduce you to people who may be able to find you a job or a freelance project.

There’s nothing wrong with self-education: Many who are in the UX field now didn’t get degrees specifically in IA, IxD, etc., as these programs are just emerging. If going back to school isn’t financially feasible for you, read up on UX through blogs, discussion forums, and recommended books (many of which are available in libraries.)

Coco Before Chanel is the perfect movie break from your latest UX project. Seeing her at work on her designs – cutting the fabric, laying it out on the dressforms, her meticulous handsewing – is truly inspiring. There are times when she’s in that state of effortless flow we all long for. And there are times when she’s frustrated and blocked, but she still keeps at it. It’s become all too easy for us beginners to be frustrated and discouraged by the current job market, which leads to an inertia of sorts (I too am guilty of this, seeing the time gap between this post and my last one.) But we all just need to keep at it.

If you’ve never been to a design slam, it can be a pretty intense experience, especially if you sign up to be a design team member. I had no idea what I was in for, but it was worth it.

The rush to create deliverables and a cohesive presentation within a scant 40 minutes is like cramming for a comprehensive exam the night before. But it trains you to think on the fly (which is often what you’ll be doing anyway as a UX designer) and how to collaborate with people you’ve only met a half hour ago. The specific challenge we were faced with made me wish that I had read Nathan Shedroff’s book beforehand – we had to focus on sustainabilty and being “green,” not as a mere trend, but as the focus of the company. Among other ideas my team came up with, we thought of placing recipes on the online site, with links to the ingredients where customers could then place an order and pick up in person.

Alas, we lost. We think it was rigged by that guy in the red shirt…he owns the place where the design slam was held, after all.

Okay, so I said I would write a review of Subject to Change, but this book has floored me and I had to write about it. You know this book is good for UX designers if Bill Buxton offered his insights and reviewed the manuscript of it!

Roger Martin has written a much-needed call to arms to fuse analysis and intuition in our design thinking; too many have the tendency to lean towards one or the other, which often leads to either a lack of innovation (as seen when Nokia was knocked from its pedestal) or to impractical design. He writes at length about “abductive logic,” a term coined by Charles Sanders Pierce that essentially states that new ideas can only be validated through the unfolding of future events.

We should always “ask what could be.” (25) It’s the reason behind the success of the likes of Mike Lazaridis of Research In Motion and Guy Laliberté of Cirque du Soleil. Martin outlines the three things a design thinker needs in their arsenal: a personal stance, tools and experiences. It’s essential to follow this order so your design thinking can flourish. Be conscious of how you see the world and your place in it, and then develop a toolkit of sorts based on your stance, using the powers of observation and imagination, among other things. Accumulating experiences will then allow you to hone your sensitivity and skills. Martin likens it to being a chef: sensitivity is what allows a chef to determine if a dish is well-prepared, and skills allow them to determine when it’s not. (155)

Designers tend to run into and work with those who are either reliability-driven analytical thinkers or validity-driven intuitive thinkers. (168) While the personal goal is to have a balance of both, it’s possible to be a good mediator when dealing with both types. Much like learning a language, the best way to learn is to spend time among native speakers using it in native context.

LU makes some of the most delicious biscuits I’ve ever tasted, all the more so if you’re a chocolate lover. But I’m disappointed by one thing – they’ve recently changed their packaging.

Yes, they still taste wonderful, but the dark packaging threw me for a loop. Before this incarnation, the box was white with a blue stripe indicating that it’s milk chocolate (the dark chocolate had red and the hazlenut had green – check this website for the old style.) This new packaging makes it hard to distinguish between the different varieties, and had I not slowed down to look at what was printed on the box, I could’ve easily brought home a flavor I wasn’t expecting.

What was wrong with the previous design? The typography was legible and it was easy to distinguish from other brands on the shelf. I feel this is an example of change for the sake of change, which isn’t necessarily a good thing.

It’s ironic that I’m writing about this book considering there are already boatloads of reviews on other UX-related blogs. So I’m late to the party on this. It isn’t meant to be an in-depth analysis, but reading this has given me food for thought when it comes to designing.

This is not a book about UX design, but it certainly has some takeaway points. Schwartz isn’t advocating for no choice at all, but anyone who’s gone shopping for something as simple as a bottle of shampoo realizes that having too many choices can be just as oppressive. As designers, we need to be aware that there are numerous other aspects of a user’s life that require hefty thought – this shouldn’t be the case when it comes to visiting a website, as Steven Krug would say. If anything, Schwartz’s idea of making decisions irreversible is one that can’t be fully applied to interfaces, websites, etc. Surely we’re glad that we can remove an item from our shopping cart when we feel the need to. On the other hand, it’s nice to go to a website that doesn’t have a laundry list of links to scroll through and click on, or be able to pick and choose what icons we want to appear on the screen (if any) when we boot up a device.

We need to give users meaningful choices, even though Schwartz rightfully points out that “we don’t always know what we want.” (51) Nevertheless, we should try to strike a balance between a user being boxed into an option that may not be what they need or want, and having free reign to choose whatever, which may make the user not choose anything at all. The biggest point that really stood out to me was “Don’t be tempted by ‘new and improved.’” (228) If there’s a pet peeve I have about design it’s innovation for its own sake. Keep interfaces simple and consistent (I’m looking at you, Microsoft!)

Next review to come – Subject to Change by Peter Merholz. I’m sure there’s a ton of reviews already, but I’m writing one anyway. Because I can.