Friday, February 13, 2009

The economy and usability fail each other... again.

In this story from CNN about the economic stimulus bill, there is a quote from a Republican which has a lot of validity to it:

Some representatives expressed frustration over how little time they had to read the 1,000-plus page bill.

"You can't be serious. This would be humorous if it wasn't so sad," said Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia. "What's in it? Have you read it?"

I blogged before about how usability could improve the mortgage process, and I think it could stand to do a lot to improve how bills are handled as well. No doubt the fine print of bills are necessary, but, at some point you have to be realistic. No one has time to read 1,000 page bills. It would take, probably quite literally, a few days straight of reading to get through it, let alone fully digest and understand it.

And furthermore, it reduces transparency -- we do operate in a representative government where we don't expect average citizens to have the time (or inclination) to know everything about every bill, law, and regulation -- but sometimes it would be nice to know exactly what our reps are doing.

So why not have a straight up bulleted list up front of all the items contained within? It could look as simple as this, or even break down each section a little further:
  • $12 billion for street repairs (p. 193-195)
  • $27 billion for environmentally friendly fuels (p. 344-350)
  • $19 billion for school construction (p. 507-524)
  • And so on...
Of course, that may oversimplify things, but if you're fairly certain you're on board with street repairs, but not so sure about environmentally friendly fuels, you can focus on reading the fuels section.

This isn't about being too lazy to read, it's about realistically improving the decision-making process. Big long documents shouldn't be impressive -- clearly written and easy-to-understand documents should. If you have to have the former, the least you can do is provide the option of the latter.

(Note: I'm not making any commentary on whether or not I agree with the Republicans' stance on the stimulus bill, but I am more than willing to highlight a valid point!)

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Beware the permanent brainstorm

There is a particular type of person out there who is very creative, who loves to come up with new ideas, who gets excited about a new concept they think could be really successful or beneficial. These people are vital -- without them, many (if not all) of the big ideas that have changed our lives would never have happened.

But there is one flaw that often comes hand-in-hand with this level of creativity and brainstorming. For every Steve Jobs (Apple), Bill Gates (Microsoft), and Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), there is that friend you have who is convinced that adding zipper pockets to suspenders is the next big thing. Or maybe that was last week, and now they're pitching tiny umbrellas for cellphones. In any case, their mind seems to always be working, but never carrying through the thoughts to something that is not only a great idea, but one that they can (and do) actually implement. I call this the danger of the "permanent brainstorm."

Those examples are extreme, but I believe there can be a real danger to focusing so much on the brainstorming and "ideating" portion of a project that you never get off the ground and develop something real.

For a more grounded example, consider a project where a company wants to come up with a new marketing website. All they know at first is that they want to target a new audience that they don't currently speak to. The brainstorming phase begins, and the team narrows it down to one particular concept.

This could go two ways -- the team could further focus in, delineate their ideas, and develop them into a site and get it live.

Or they could just keep brainstorming. What if we broaden it to include this other audience as well? What if we focus more on the interactive games? What if we switch from an edgy/rough look to a clean/modern look? And then after trying all those alternatives, they keep spinning around to other ideas. A hot new competitor site shows up halfway through the project, and they want to take some of the competitor's ideas and re-think the original goal.

You get the picture. The ideas keep coming, the project keeps changing, people second-guess their original ideas and the whole thing continues to mutate and shift even as it's supposed to be nearing its completion. The budget has swelled, the timeline has been shot, and corners are being cut that could make the difference between something great and simple and something overly ambitious and complicated.

Of course, this is not to say that brainstorming is bad - as I mentioned before, it's the brainstormers who come up with all the big new ideas. The key is knowing when to shift away from generating more ideas and shift toward refining and implementing your original idea. It can be scary sometimes to do this, but it's all about putting a stake in the ground and saying "this phase is done, we need to move on to the next phase, or else we're going to get stuck."

That can be a hard thing to do. Nobody likes the idea of setting something in stone when they are anything less than 100% sure of it -- and rarely is any new idea a 100% bet. But this is where handy metaphors and sayings run short -- unless you are engraving tombstones, you're not literally setting things in stone. You can make changes later on if need be -- it's just important to respect that those changes should be based on fully reasoned thinking, not whims, or a dream you had last night, or what your 5 year old said when he saw a mock-up of the project.

Be excited. Think wildly. But recognize that as part of any project, brainstorming is just step one. It takes a lot of work to turn a good idea into a good product, and you'll never get to a successful end if you never leave step one.

Monday, February 2, 2009

michaelhisten.com 3.0



It wasn't that long ago that I did a redesign of my portfolio website, www.michaelhisten.com. It was not a very dramatic change, it mostly focused on enhancing the content and involved adding my beloved color switcher. But as I started writing more in this blog, I realized I wasn't listening to a lot of my own advice when it came to my own site.

I was concerned about a few things -- one, the level of simplicity of the old site was so extreme that I was worried people would assume that's all I could do. To make up for that, I've ditched the "no graphics" concept and used some imagery and gradients, including using the font FD Helwoodica, an all-lowercase distressed take on my favorite font, Helvetica.

But perhaps my biggest issue with my site was that I was falling victim to that perennial trap -- thinking my content was more interesting than it was. Some site statistics bore this out, but basically, people didn't bother reading much of any of the content pages and just went straight for the portfolio section. To top it off, my portfolio examples did not have thumbnail imagery to give you a preview until you clicked on the name of a project. This, combined with some research into how other designers out there are presenting their profiles, led me to embrace the idea of a one-page website.

Yup, just one page, there's nothing more than what you see when you land there. Of course, clicking thumbnails gives you larger views (much larger than before -- more than twice as large, in fact) of each project, but now all those projects are front and center. I think the end result is that people will get a quick glimpse of what I can do, and they can then read a little bit in the area at the bottom of the page, and then I encourage them to contact me for more. If they want to read more about me and my design philosophy, the blog is right here. All in all, I'm very happy with the update.

Oh, and that color switcher is still there -- I still love the idea of giving visitors a little interactivity!