Comments on: How Good Is Good Enough? http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough Not Just For Breakfast Anymore Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:31:01 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: EZ http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-845 EZ Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:15:38 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-845 The industrial designer in me says bravo, while the marketer in me prods to get the thing out already. A good compromise may be that each product only gets one post-design, pre-launch ethnographic evaluation, otherwise there might be the temptation to do it again after the results from the first evaluation have been implemented into the product (just to make sure), ad infinitum. Perhaps limit the time or number of changes that can be made to each product before it must get launched. Indeed, maybe the fact that Ethnographic Evaluations are not done actually help get products into the marketplace, for better or worse, but at least they’re out there making money for the company. Or alienating customers. The industrial designer in me says bravo, while the marketer in me prods to get the thing out already. A good compromise may be that each product only gets one post-design, pre-launch ethnographic evaluation, otherwise there might be the temptation to do it again after the results from the first evaluation have been implemented into the product (just to make sure), ad infinitum. Perhaps limit the time or number of changes that can be made to each product before it must get launched. Indeed, maybe the fact that Ethnographic Evaluations are not done actually help get products into the marketplace, for better or worse, but at least they’re out there making money for the company. Or alienating customers.

]]> By: Aaron http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-844 Aaron Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:01:20 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-844 Yes, that's part of what we do, but it's for research & idea development, not usually post-design evaluation. By the time a product is designed "enough" to be used in the real world, it's on final approach to delivery. The normal feedback path then is: does it sell? Does it review well? For most companies in my experience, ethnographic research (or name-your-favorite research technique) into how the product actually gets used doesn't happen until it's time to develop input into the next version of the product. Maybe that happens years later, which a completely different management team involved. It would be more interesting to have the design & marketing teams involved with "revision A" of a product to research into what works and what doesn't while it's still fresh. Yes, that’s part of what we do, but it’s for research & idea development, not usually post-design evaluation. By the time a product is designed “enough” to be used in the real world, it’s on final approach to delivery. The normal feedback path then is: does it sell? Does it review well? For most companies in my experience, ethnographic research (or name-your-favorite research technique) into how the product actually gets used doesn’t happen until it’s time to develop input into the next version of the product. Maybe that happens years later, which a completely different management team involved. It would be more interesting to have the design & marketing teams involved with “revision A” of a product to research into what works and what doesn’t while it’s still fresh.

]]> By: EZ http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-842 EZ Tue, 30 Sep 2008 05:12:55 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-842 I propose that the designers, marketers, and consumers be both observers and observed for such evaluation. Mix in and try the product together. You can tell them you're the designer (I find that people are more than willing to share their thoughts with me as a designer, more so than with me as the marketer) or pretend you're just another consumer. Which, in a way, we should be. When I do ethnography while people cook, I try to be more of the friend over for dinner, chatting while they cook, stirring and tasting the sauce to see if it needs more garlic, trying their favorite products that they proudly take out of their cupboards. Not as scientific, perhaps, but not as sterile either. And a lot more fun for everybody involved. Didn't Continuum do that for the Coleman Grill ethnography? Didn't the researchers go to people's homes and grill with them? I propose that the designers, marketers, and consumers be both observers and observed for such evaluation. Mix in and try the product together. You can tell them you’re the designer (I find that people are more than willing to share their thoughts with me as a designer, more so than with me as the marketer) or pretend you’re just another consumer. Which, in a way, we should be. When I do ethnography while people cook, I try to be more of the friend over for dinner, chatting while they cook, stirring and tasting the sauce to see if it needs more garlic, trying their favorite products that they proudly take out of their cupboards. Not as scientific, perhaps, but not as sterile either. And a lot more fun for everybody involved. Didn’t Continuum do that for the Coleman Grill ethnography? Didn’t the researchers go to people’s homes and grill with them?

]]> By: Aaron http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-841 Aaron Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:20:40 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-841 Agreed - but (as usual), it's complicated. It's easy to get 50 people to play with a product for a few minutes each in front of a designer or marketer. And it's easy to get a few people to use a product for a longer time and bring the company along for the ride. But it's hard to get designers or marketers in the field with consumers at the depth that may be required to know if a product delivers both a good "learn to use it" experience and a good "live with it" experience. Maybe there's a need for something called "ethnographic evaluation." Agreed – but (as usual), it’s complicated. It’s easy to get 50 people to play with a product for a few minutes each in front of a designer or marketer. And it’s easy to get a few people to use a product for a longer time and bring the company along for the ride. But it’s hard to get designers or marketers in the field with consumers at the depth that may be required to know if a product delivers both a good “learn to use it” experience and a good “live with it” experience. Maybe there’s a need for something called “ethnographic evaluation.”

]]> By: EZ http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-840 EZ Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:23:55 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-840 Perhaps it just reflects the emotional and physical disconnect between designers and marketers with their customers, a lack of empathy that I think would be helped by not only trying the prototype 50 times, but watching their customers use it 50 times. A few times is not enough- too easy to rationalize away behavior when it is inconsistant with the beliefs of the designer or marketer, who by this point probably have blinders on as to how the product should and can be used. I think it is beneficial for us to be sitting in the same room with our customers, not watching them on video, so we can really feel their frustration and not easily wiggle out of our discomfort. Perhaps it just reflects the emotional and physical disconnect between designers and marketers with their customers, a lack of empathy that I think would be helped by not only trying the prototype 50 times, but watching their customers use it 50 times. A few times is not enough- too easy to rationalize away behavior when it is inconsistant with the beliefs of the designer or marketer, who by this point probably have blinders on as to how the product should and can be used. I think it is beneficial for us to be sitting in the same room with our customers, not watching them on video, so we can really feel their frustration and not easily wiggle out of our discomfort.

]]> By: Aaron http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-839 Aaron Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:49:58 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-839 Right. Everyone involved has their own definition of "done" and the one that matters is the consumer's. Except that consumers aren't necessarily the best judges (see Elke Den Ouden's research showing that half of all product returns are due to complexity or misunderstanding - they either bought the wrong thing or couldn't figure it out). But it's that definition of "done" that drives the issue. Is it a lack of requirements? A lack of differentiation between requirements and goals? Right. Everyone involved has their own definition of “done” and the one that matters is the consumer’s. Except that consumers aren’t necessarily the best judges (see Elke Den Ouden’s research showing that half of all product returns are due to complexity or misunderstanding – they either bought the wrong thing or couldn’t figure it out).

But it’s that definition of “done” that drives the issue. Is it a lack of requirements? A lack of differentiation between requirements and goals?

]]> By: EZ http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-838 EZ Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:19:26 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-838 I believe the designer's reasons for feeling hesitant, being as involved with the birth and upbringing of the product as they are, differ from the marketers, who are probably more concerned with sales than anything else. The designer is more like a parent watching their child go off to school for the first time, worried that they're not ready, that they might not stand up for themselves, whereas the marketer is perhaps more like an employer, wondering only if the kid is ready to make money for him. If the marketer has more input into the design, or even into how the kid dresses to come to school (the packaging), they might become more emotionally involved. But as you say, is that really a good thing? Personally I think it is, since I've been involved with some products that were simply not ready to be made, but were pushed forward because of internal pressure, and ended up with problems which hurt the overall brand. Perhaps it comes down to asking "Is it good enough that people will both buy it and like it?" The answer may be in the question. I believe the designer’s reasons for feeling hesitant, being as involved with the birth and upbringing of the product as they are, differ from the marketers, who are probably more concerned with sales than anything else. The designer is more like a parent watching their child go off to school for the first time, worried that they’re not ready, that they might not stand up for themselves, whereas the marketer is perhaps more like an employer, wondering only if the kid is ready to make money for him. If the marketer has more input into the design, or even into how the kid dresses to come to school (the packaging), they might become more emotionally involved. But as you say, is that really a good thing? Personally I think it is, since I’ve been involved with some products that were simply not ready to be made, but were pushed forward because of internal pressure, and ended up with problems which hurt the overall brand. Perhaps it comes down to asking “Is it good enough that people will both buy it and like it?” The answer may be in the question.

]]> By: Aaron http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-837 Aaron Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:35:06 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-837 Hi EZ, I know what you mean. But why do you think marketers are less emotionally involved? How can designers "hook" marketing types in so they feel as emotionally involved? Or is it good that someone in the chain has a more objective sense of "good enough"? Maybe no product would ever ship if everyone was as emotionally involved as the designer... A Hi EZ,

I know what you mean. But why do you think marketers are less emotionally involved? How can designers “hook” marketing types in so they feel as emotionally involved? Or is it good that someone in the chain has a more objective sense of “good enough”? Maybe no product would ever ship if everyone was as emotionally involved as the designer…

A

]]> By: EZ http://www.productbehavior.com/archive/how-good-is-good-enough/comment-page-1#comment-836 EZ Tue, 23 Sep 2008 03:47:22 +0000 http://www.productbehavior.com/?p=228#comment-836 It's much more difficult for me to get to that decision as the designer than it used to be as the marketer. The emotional component of the product being an expression of myself results in a whole lot more "not good enough yet." I recently gave the seal of approval to a product, though, when testers could no longer tell the difference between two versions of the product, or said the differences didn't matter to them. Good to have you back, by the way! It’s much more difficult for me to get to that decision as the designer than it used to be as the marketer. The emotional component of the product being an expression of myself results in a whole lot more “not good enough yet.” I recently gave the seal of approval to a product, though, when testers could no longer tell the difference between two versions of the product, or said the differences didn’t matter to them.

Good to have you back, by the way!

]]>