User involvement (HCI)

As evidenced, project work has intensified over this month (not that I'm one to complain). However, this doesn't mean that I haven't had time to keep up with all the theory behind interaction design. I've still been reading up on Human Computer Interaction and have picked out some points that strike critical reflection.

One such issue is user involvement. There has been debate as to whether it is a good or bad thing. HCI highlights an example by The Open University (UK), in which users were given more significant roles in developing a computerised system of network support due to the huge numbers of students and staff. One user was even appointed project manager. This confirmed that involving users can make things more difficult than necessary.

Good points:

• Involving users made the system closer to what all users wanted
• It made the system easier and more user-friendly

Bad points:

• There was a lack of continuity, because users were not involved from beginning to end
• Other users who were less involved did not feel that their needs were adequately met
• Lack of decision-making and ownership (by ownership, I mean the "I don't know, you decide" attitude)

Microsoft on the other hand, have a much more thorough and varied user involvement, and continually monitor the user interaction with a product throughout the entire development. There are a variety of ways in which Microsoft employs, and particular techniques such as the 'activity-based planning' which involves studying what users do to achieve a certain task and using that data to choose a product feature accordingly. They also test what a developer believes to be a finished product by inviting outsiders to perform certain tasks on it, and the performance is observed and recorded. Microsoft however have a massive consumer base, so they are in a position to be rectifying issues with their products. It is noted however that around 30% of them call their support lines with issues and frustrations resulting from errors and poor features (Cusumano and Selby, 1995), but that still suggests that the company focuses a great deal of effort and resources into usability and user experience.

From these two examples, you could say that it is both good and bad, and really depends on how and at what point of development you involve users. I wonder how this might be an option for the Castle Project when the Discovery Surface is built and finished before the launch of the exhibition. I personally don't feel that we should until the exhibition, because that's what it is: an exhibition; not a Microsoft product. It may also slow things down, which I would find immensely annoying. We have a better luxury of time that I think should be used wisely for this project. However, I don't think it will hurt to invite outside users (or maybe students) to come along and interact with the table for observational and testing purposes.