The following is my brief, rough summary of Chapter 6 of The Design of Everyday Things by Don Norman with some of my thoughts in response to key passages. Because I read this chapter during my New Year’s holiday, this is not my highest quality work.
Chapter Title: Design Thinking
This chapter gives an overview of various frameworks and tools that can be used to guide and improve the design process. It starts by outlining the double-diamond approach to design thinking: use divergent thinking to consider all possible root causes, then converge on a single one; diverge again to consider all possible solutions, then converge on one that best addresses the relevant human needs. The key to effectively solving problems in the real world, as Norman explains, is first questioning whether the problem that is proposed to you to solve is truly the root problem. He summarizes all of this in this quote:
“They [good designers] don’t try to search for a solution until they have determined the real problem, and even then, instead of solving that problem, they stop to consider a wide range of potential solutions.”
The Design of Everyday Things, p. 219
Norman then explains how this relates to human-centered design:
“Human-centered design (HCD) is the process of ensuring that people’s needs are met, that the resulting product is understandable and usable, that it accomplishes the desired tasks, and that the experience of use is positive and enjoyable… with an emphasis on two things: solving the right problem, and doing so in a way that meets human needs and capabilities.”
The Design of Everyday Things, p. 219
What stands out to me most in this quote, mostly because I think it’s often an afterthought, is that a core tenet of human-centered design is creating experiences that are enjoyable for the user. One way I’ve seen this done is by apps showing relatively humanized, humorous messaging such as “Hmm… We’re having some technical difficulties” or “Oops! This page doesn’t exist.” I’m also reminded of how some industries rely on enjoyable experiences to differentiate themselves against competitors, specifically with packaging on “high end” items like chocolates or dish towels. The quality of the actual chocolate or dish towel, from what I can tell, is similar to competitors; it is the thoughtful, joy-inspiring packaging that enables the higher end versions to be priced higher.
Norman then explains that in a design lifecycle there are four activities that should be done iteratively: idea generation, prototyping, testing, and observation. In order to do this more effectively, he urges that designers should observe users in their natural environment and any groups being studied should be closely representative of the intended users. I’ve always thought that the most effective way to observe how users perform activities and interact with a product is to shadow them live, but I’ve never heard of a company actually doing this – if you know one, please share.
Norman then distinguishes design and marketing research goals:
“Design wants to know what people really need and how they actually will use the product or service under consideration. Marketing wants to know what people will buy, which includes learning how they make their purchasing decisions.”
The Design of Everyday Things, p. 224
Norman adds that design research will often lean qualitative while marketing research will lean quantitative. For some reason skincare comes to mind here, in which it seems that a combination of design and marketing research has illuminated that the core, most sellable human need in the case of skin care is not medical grade products but rather skin care products that feel medical enough to make users feel that they are in control of their appearance as well as packages that look aesthetically pleasing on a counter. Also, the combination of research has probably added that the products need to be expensive enough that users feel like they’re truly investing in their health while still being relatively affordable. I’m probably missing more, but the skin care industry strikes me as an area that has done extensive research into what the actual, core human need is rather than just assuming that the highest quality or most affordable product is what people will want.
Finally, this chapter touches on activity-centered design, where designers study activities and what users need in order to complete specific activities, then they design to address those needs, centering decisions around the core activity. An everyday product that I feel fails to design for the relevant activity is the control panel knobs on most cars. From what I’ve observed, most panels are overly complicated, not very intuitive, and as a result require relatively high engagement, completely ignoring the context that most users should be simultaneously focusing all of their attention on another, much more critical activity.
And, for the record, I fall victim to a lot of this skin care marketing, too.
Thanks for reading.
Works Cited
Norman, Donald A. The Design of Everyday Things. MIT Press, 2013.
BYOMSPM 
Leave a comment