Wham-Bam Wireframe and other Miscellaneous Stimulations that Encouraged Me at #uxcamplondon
A most stimulating day sponsored by Vodafone, Gum Tree, Addlestones Cider and some others, and organised by Dees and some others
Here follows an encouraging miscellany of personal stimulata…
Talk: Accessible Mobile Web
The presenter is about to kick-off a research project on mobile web for users with disabilities.
My main encouraging moment came in the questions. One of the attendees started talking about how flash might or might not work on some phones, how javascript was imperfectly implemented, like that. The presenter said he was going to start his research by discovering what users with disabilities actually want to do with the mobile web. Outstanding, I thought.
It seems obvious, yet most mobile websites that I see appear to have begun their design by asking: How will our website look in a mobile browser? What technologies can we use to present our desktop website on the phone?
The first question should be: What features of our service do users want to access when mobile?
Talk: The Big Picture
The presenter is a UX designer working in an Agile Development regime. They talked about how to present information internally.
My main encouraging moment in this talk was quite near the start. The speaker related that, when they had joined their current employer, they had been labelled a “user champion”. Oh dear. The speaker soon shifted away from this ridiculous buzz-wordy title, and instead found themselves “talking in user terms”.
I’m very encouraged to meet other people who reject the buzzwords of the day, but still follow up-to-date best practise.
Talk: Emotion in design
The presenter is a UX designer at Motorola, the phone manufacturer.
Yes, it’s an American company, and yes, he was from America. So he’d come a long way to give his presentation. With that in mind and not wishing to be inhospitable, it seemed churlish that I should insist on telling him what I think of his employer’s product.
Then again, I knew that I would never be able to look at myself in the mirror, nor my interaction designer in the eye, if I did not tell him. What to do? I mean, I need to look at myself in the mirror once a week in order to shave.
Luckily for me the discussion after the talk pretty soon descended into Apple-bashing. Hence I was able to execute what I believe is termed a segue in the name of getting back on topic. From a point about the quality of what you see and hold in your hand before you switch on a device, I slipped in that Motorola phones are pretty poor when you actually start using them.
My interaction designer will be proud.
How did the presenter take it? He gave a wry smile. Yeah, he knew already. Later he mentioned that he works “mostly on the design side” which I guess means the superficial* part.
(I mean superficial* in the medical sense: on or near the surface.)
Talk: Agile moaning and wailing
Yes, that was the title. There was no presentation, as such; this was more of an open chat session.
People talked about the problems they face as UX designers while working with or in Agile teams. Here’s a few that were memorable, to me at least.
“When you’re a freelance UX designer, the project manager doesn’t give you the chance to sit with the developers, which is key if they are Agile.”
I can’t help thinking that this is bound to happen when you’re being paid by the hour. I’m not saying it’s your fault, mind. I’m sure you ended up doing hit-and-run UX design because your last permanent employer finally succeeded in persuading you that you don’t own the thing you make. (OK, hit-and-run isn’t quite right because in a hit-and-run there’s only one guilty party. It’s more like wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am.)
Anyway, point is that a UX designer isn’t carpet. You can’t buy it by the metre, and then walk all over it. You need your UX designers to be stakeholders in the software that is being produced, which means them being permanent team members.
“Developers focus on the minimal function, as defined by the user story, not on delivering an excellent user experience.”
It’s easy to see how this could happen in an organisation that has gone Agile in name only. Hey Project Manager, you’re now a Scrum Master. Hey Requirements Analyst, you’re now a Product Owner. Hey the Functional Specification is now the User Stories. Hey, we’re Agile, mission accomplished.
See what’s happened? The developers have been told to implement the User Stories instead of the Functional Specification. That doesn’t work because the Functional Specification is not replaced by the User Stories alone, but by the User Stories plus all the conversations the team has about the User Stories.
So, what’s the solution? If I were of a religious inclination I suppose I would insist on strict adherence to Agile methodologies. But I’m not, so I blame the person responsible, in this case the Product Owner.
“The Product Owner should block the Done state of a User Story if the user experience is not good enough.”
That was my quote and I think on the day I said “… if the interaction designer is not happy with it.” I’m backing off from that because always saying yes to your UX designer is like always saying yes to your coders, your testers, your sales people or your customers.
And on that note of compromise, I move on as did the participants in the discussion. That happens at barcamps sometimes; time runs out and you go to the next talk. No bad thing, and fairly Agile when you think about it.
Talk: Search UX
Not much to say about this, except that it was an excellent talk. I never really think about how many search user interfaces there are out there.
I was reminded of a course that was part of the final year of my degree. The title of the course was Software Engineering. The point of the course was to draw a distinction between programming “in the small” and “in the large”. The Search UX talk was squarely about design “in the small” which I found encouraging.
UX Camp London had a number of “in the large” talks about the role of UX in the corporation and such. All very well, but some people still care about the basics. Some people are still pondering what is the best interface, even for a task that is now very common. And evidently, they are still coming up with new and better approaches.
The presenter didn’t actually use the phrase but his thesis was “we can do better than Google.” I approve.
Talk: Textual interfaces
Another good talk that provoked plenty of discussion, in part about what actually counts as a textual interface.
Turns out the command line is alive and well and residing in Google search. I’ll probably stick to goosh.org myself, mostly because it maintains the fine tradition of Unix humour.
Talk: Addressed to me, Visible to me
Erm, my presentation. Only two people attended but we had a nice enough chat that lasted for the allotted time. Afterwards, I wandered about looking to fill the last talk-slot of the day. I found another talk attended by two people, and even a talk attended by only one person. So I didn’t feel bad getting an audience of two.
Conclusion
The event’s conclusion started over ciders in the kitchen, and continued at some pub or other where a free bar had been arranged. I wimped out and came home.
But I do feel encouraged to give a talk at a barcamp again. Next time, I’ll bag a slot earlier in the day, when everybody’s still there. I’ll also give my talk a better title; something more provocative and informative.
Until then, I’ll have to get my stimulation from elsewhere. I could always get it from my job, I suppose…
Copyright © Jim Hawkins, 2009
