How to overcome resistance to the implementation of User-Centered Design.

Incorporating usability techniques and processes of User-Centered Design (UCD) in companies that are not used to working with them can become a daunting task. Over and over again we hear arguments that justify the rejection and invalidate the possibility of change, even if this is minimal. This article describes the most common arguments we hear, and proposes concrete actions to refute the negatives.

Common barriers and excuses to implementing UCD

Over the past ten years, I have had the opportunity to work for companies of different markets and I find that the difficulties and barriers to implementing UCD are quite similar, regardless of the type of company or sector in which they operate.

However, the problems are different depending on the degree of maturity of each company in relation to usability and user-centered design. Taking the maturity model developed by Keikendo (link in Spanish), an IT and UX training company, it is possible to address barriers and common excuses that the design and development teams typically use, and present each one of them with arguments and concrete actions that neutralize them:

Stage of maturity	Common barriers and excuses	Arguments and courses of action
1. Unintentional User experience is not designed intentionally.	Ignorance: Usability and UX discipline is unknown.	Training.
	Rejection: Experience design is considered unnecessary.	Do nothing. They will discover the UX value on their own.
	Incompatibility: The methodology does not allow user testing.	Do usability testing with the finished product to expose the problems.
2. Self-reference Interface is designed as if users were members of the design and development team.	Cost constraints.	With 10% of the total budget of a project you can achieve an 83% improvement.
	Time constraints.	A round of user testing can be completed in one week.
	Lack of specialized resources.	Outsourcing, hire new resources or train existing ones.
3. Expert Based on the experience of one person. There is no method.	No formalized methodology.	Design and implement a feasible methodology, not an ideal one.
	Perception of uncertainty on results.	Quantitative and qualitative assessments during the test.
4. Centralized There is person in charge of experience design. There is a method.	Usability and user experience is required for certain projects, not for all of them.	Use metrics from projects based on UCD and compare them with projects that used other methodologies.
5. Distributed All teams are aware of usability and UCD. There is a method.	Resistance from senior management.	ROI is the keyword: Take metrics and show how the UCD boosts ROI.

Table: The five maturity levels, the barriers and the actions to take.

Specific arguments and courses of action to fight resistance:

Training : Some of the actions you can take when your client doesn’t know anything about usability and user-centered design are providing introductory courses, invite them to professional meetings or even explain the main concepts at informal meetings.

Choose your battles: The arguments heard rejecting UCD range from “boring” to “not necessary”. Whatever the case, it is not worth spending too much time convincing naysayers. The impact of UCD on business, the final quality achieved for a given product, and improvements in customer satisfaction are explicit benefits. Being against UCD is based mainly on dogma than reason.

User testing: In addition to being one of the main techniques of UCD, user testing is a powerful realization tool. It is important to involve design and development team members, and even invite managers and stakeholders to the usability sessions.  Watching and listening to users has a magical effect on those who continue to oppose to this methodology.

Comparing costs: In order to dissolve the excuse about costs, just demonstrate what the cost of not using a user-centered design methodology would be. The UCD is more efficient than other methods and reduces costs in development, maintenance, training, and support.

Prioritizing with time constraints: UCD allows for prioritization initiatives.  When time is short it is very important to decide which tasks should be carried out within the time available to obtain the best possible results. A round of user testing with just five users allows identifying most of the usability problems of any interface and can be done in one week. At the end of just one round, valuable information is gathered to support future design and development decisions.

Relying on experts: If the project is important for the company don’t hesitate to hire a consultant o a UX agency. In addition to solving the problem, the company can learn from them during the process.

Remove barriers related to the methodology: The process of UCD is not dogmatic.  In fact, it is considered one of the so-called agile methodologies, defined as a process rather than a structured methodology. This allows greater flexibility and adaptability to the requirements of each specific project.

Reducing uncertainty: The best way to generate certainty and reduce resistance to the adoption of user-centered design is to show quantitative and qualitative results from using this method. This involves measuring key variables of each project. The three most common variables are: effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction.

Break the resistance of stakeholders: From a business perspective it is more convincing to use metrics that feed into the traditional equation of a successful Web site: I = V x C x R, where:

• I: Income
  V: Number of unique visitors
  C: Conversion rate
  R: Return rate

What is contextual inquery?

In the user experience field, user research is taking more and more relevance. Contextual inquiry adds useful information about the way people interact with products. To know the real context of use allows development teams to create more friendly, adaptive and innovative interfaces.

 

Contextual inquiry is one of the techniques used in user-centered design with the purpose of knowing the context of use for a given product (software, device, Web site, app, etc.) 

What is the context of use?

The context of use is the real and specific situation in which final users (people) use a product.

Why it is important to know the context of use?

The context of use define the way in which a product or interface is used. The context of use is not the same for a mobile phone application than for desktop software. In the first case, it is possible that the user is moving and performing other tasks while using the phone, tasks that might require interaction with objects, people, and situations that exceed interactions produced within the phone interface itself. In the second case, the user might be sitting at his desk most of the time with the screen front him, a keyboard and a mouse. Clearly, one type of interaction is very different from the other.

How is contextual inquiry done?

The methodology of a contextual inquiry has a lot of anthropology. In fact, it could be considered derivative of participant observation, a methodology used in anthropology where the observer (consultant) goes into the daily practices of a given group of people (users) with the objective of getting to know their every day practices, in the context in which they are pursued, and with what purpose and motivations.  

Adapted to user-centered design methodology, the participant observation or contextual inquiry consists of observing users, one at a time, in a real and daily situation in which they use a given interface. Specific questions could then be asked in order to better understand what the user has done and why.

Participant observation sessions have three different stages:

• Introduction: the user is told what is going to be done and with what purpose. It is very important to generate empathy and create an atmosphere of confidence with the person to avoid bias during the observation process.  
• Observation: consists of taking notes of the users’ actions and the context in which they are developed. During this moment it is not convenient to interrupt the flux of actions with questions but rather to concentrate in practices that take place.
• Questions: this is the moment for asking questions about what was observed. The user should interrupt (if possible) his/her tasks to respond to any doubts that the consultants could have.    

Planning a contextual inquiry

The steps that should be followed to perform a contextual inquiry are very similar to other methodologies of user research. Nevertheless, it has its particularities. We recommend the following steps:

1. Research of user profiles.

2. Research of critical tasks for each profile.

3.Research of the product (software, application, Web site, device, etc.)

4.Definition of the script for observations.

5.Definition of the schedule (facilities, time and dates)

6.Recruitment of users.

7.Development of observations.

8.Analysis of the collected information.

9.Elaboration of reports.

10.Presentation of findings.

The challenge of contextual inquiry

The process of observing users interacting with a given interface and with their context could provide with insurmountable amounts of information that are difficult to process. The challenge is centered in indentifying the relevant information regarding the research objectives. This which could be seen as a very simple task requires of considerable experience from the consultant team in charge of the process, especially to arrive to solid-based conclusions from the observations conducted.  

Usability Test.

IS A POWERFUL DIAGNOSTIC TOOL TO IDENTIFY USABILITY PROBLEMS, BEFORE A WEBSITE IS PUBLISHED.

The usability test is an analysis of key aspects of an interface (website, software, mobile application) through experience and direct interaction with its users. The purpose of usability testing is to reveal usability problems and suggest recommendations for their solution, optimizing the interface, improving the user experience and consequently the chances of success of the interface. 

If the experience of users with an interface is frustrating, the impact will affect the brand, the company and the product or service in question. No matter how many analysis were made ​​during the process of building an interface, experience shows that there are problems that only appear when the interface is tested with real users. 

Why? Because an interface is developed by designers, programmers, marketeers, etc. but not by its users. You need to know what is the profile of users who interact with the interface, what are their goals, context and situation of use. An interface is always accessed with certain objectives in mind, which can be classified as follows:

• Information: when a person want to know the market price of a particular product before buying it; or read the news of the day; or know the exact amount of square kilometers China has.
• Playful: as a way to enjoy the free time to socialize, entertain and play.
• Transactional: when it is necessary to interact with an interface through a series of complex operations to obtain a certain result.

In addition to these objectives there are contexts and situations of particular use. For example it is not the same a six years old child navigating from his home, than a teenager going home and using his/her smartphone, or an adult who is connected from his/her office. The most common contexts of use are:

• Home
• Office
• Mobile

In the past two years we have seen a boom in the mobile field. Mobile connections emerged thanks to technology development that has personal connectivity to mobile phones as the main engine, and definitely is the context that will prevail in the future. 

From the combination of users objectives and contexts of use on one side, and demographic audience analysis on the other, accurate users' profiles can be built. 

With a good description of users' profiles, you can make the recruitment of individuals who will perform the tests, and then select a set of critical tasks to be performed on the site that is being tested. 

Some examples of these tasks can be: suscribe to a newsletter, buy a product, arrange a travel itinerary, or check movie listings. 

Difficulties, expressions of discomfort, as well as positive insights are collected from users while they perform tasks. The usability analyst takes notes and then evaluates each problem in order to categorize it according to type of error. 

Test results constitutes the raw material for recommendation reports with a number of changes to improve the overall experience with the interface.

Usability test provide short and long term results. The immediate result is a list of general recommendations to improve the site. The long-term benefit is a better understanding of how to design more usable products from the information obtained from  users. In addition, a usability test provides the following benefits for developers:

• Reduced production costs: the costs and time to develop an interface can be reduced by avoiding overdesign and reducing the number of subsequent changes required in the product.
• Reduced maintenance costs and support: the systems that are easy to use require less training, less support for the user and less maintenance.
• Reduced costs of use: better usability increases productivity and quality of actions and decisions; users can make a more efficient use of their time and operate the system as a whole.
• Improved product quality: the user-centered design process allows the production of better products in a market that demands easiness of use.

In short, usability testing is a powerful diagnostic tool for finding usability problems in interface design. Correcting these problems will lead to better user experience that will impact directly on the brand, product, service, and company.