Can a bad user interface be the gateway to horrible user behavior?
Submitted by LauraDeVilbiss on Tue, 16/08/2005 - 04:39.
perspectives
So, I've been thinking about this for quite a bit. It all started on Saturday at the Indianapolis Workshops on Software Testing(IWST) when Mike Kelly showed us a something called a "Blink" test, based on the book of the same name by Malcolm Gladwell, test and phrase by James Bach. And, this led me to think about Malcolm Gladwell and testing. I'm just now getting through "Blink" but I tore through "The Tipping Point" very recently so I started thinking about what in that book might teach us something about testing, the very topic of the ISTW, to come full circle. And then it came to me - GRAFFITI!
In TTP Mr. Gladwell gives a compelling example (and forgive me if I am a bit loose with the details) about an epidemic of very serious crime in NYC and how the police force began to overcome (tip) this behavior, beginning with cleaning up the graffiti in the city, particularly the subway. It seemed quite surprising to most people that cleaning up the graffiti would deter much more violent crimes. However, it seems that the graffiti was in some ways representative of a culture of violence, a very subtle but accessible permission slip for the worst kind of behavior. And this permission slip went out to everyone in the city, available to all, so the behavior became widespread. Thus, the epidemic, the tipping point.
Ok, so what does this mean about testing? Well, graffiti itself is a representation, a type of art. But, art in the way that some sounds are noise and some are music. (I realize that all of this is open to interpretation and opinion but, for the sake of argument, let's consider that this graffiti is "bad" art because it was not commissioned, or wanted or permitted to be where it was, which is a critical part of its message and may have arguably been an important part of the impact it had on people.) Creating graffiti is also an act, which requires a creator, an artist. This artist could make "good" art or "bad" art.
So, and perhaps you will think this is a big leap, it seems to me that we can parallel this to the presentation layer, the user interface of a software application and the developers are the artists. They can make good art or bad art, a mural or graffiti, a comfortable and appealing user interface or a clunky, insensitive one. This much we all know is true. My question is, how does this impact our users? Can the user interface of our application be a tipping point for our users and, if so, what does it tip?
Now, I'm going to throw a few thoughts out there. Could a "graffiti" interface tip a user's sanity? Probably not, hopefully not. But, it is, of course, likely to tip them against the tool or product. Personally, I tip against anything I can't use comfortably, and quickly. That's why I like my cell phone but not my VCR, loooove copiers (one big green button) and hate hate hate fax machines (400 tiny buttons that mean nothing to me)! It's also why people still have lots of paper-based processes...they are more familiar and, therefore, easier for them.
So, back to what tips. I'm mostly thinking that an unusable interface that tips users in a negative direction will tip them into the same (proportionately, of course) bad behavior that the graffiti did in the city. What does that mean? It means, problem #1 They will rebel and not use the product you just spent tons of money on, and it will become a rent free shelf squatter for the rest of its life. #2 They will become angry at the product for being lousy and making their lives miserable, the vendor (or internal development team) for building such a lousy product, and the organization for making them use it.
This is all very bad. But, I think it gets worse. Then they talk about it, often, a lot, with many different people. And I'll throw out another "Tipping Point" thought. Gladwell says good size tipping groups are around 150 folks or less. I think this is a reasonable size for a small company using a new time tracking system, an accounting department using a new invoicing system or a team at an external client using your brand new extranet. What does this mean? This means that software applications are a prime target, or opportunity, for tipping internal or external customers.
Now that I think about it, Gladwell's archtypes - connectors, mavens and salesmen - are ripe for software tipping. This is not new, of course. They are our "evangelists" or "power users" or "product champions".
Ok, I think that's it for now. But, I want to think through this a little more. I realize none of it is really new, per say. But I think Gladwell's concepts and insights might be a useful way to view what we do about building user interfaces, and/or managing user satisfaction, if anything. If anyone has an example of software tipping, please post!
In TTP Mr. Gladwell gives a compelling example (and forgive me if I am a bit loose with the details) about an epidemic of very serious crime in NYC and how the police force began to overcome (tip) this behavior, beginning with cleaning up the graffiti in the city, particularly the subway. It seemed quite surprising to most people that cleaning up the graffiti would deter much more violent crimes. However, it seems that the graffiti was in some ways representative of a culture of violence, a very subtle but accessible permission slip for the worst kind of behavior. And this permission slip went out to everyone in the city, available to all, so the behavior became widespread. Thus, the epidemic, the tipping point.
Ok, so what does this mean about testing? Well, graffiti itself is a representation, a type of art. But, art in the way that some sounds are noise and some are music. (I realize that all of this is open to interpretation and opinion but, for the sake of argument, let's consider that this graffiti is "bad" art because it was not commissioned, or wanted or permitted to be where it was, which is a critical part of its message and may have arguably been an important part of the impact it had on people.) Creating graffiti is also an act, which requires a creator, an artist. This artist could make "good" art or "bad" art.
So, and perhaps you will think this is a big leap, it seems to me that we can parallel this to the presentation layer, the user interface of a software application and the developers are the artists. They can make good art or bad art, a mural or graffiti, a comfortable and appealing user interface or a clunky, insensitive one. This much we all know is true. My question is, how does this impact our users? Can the user interface of our application be a tipping point for our users and, if so, what does it tip?
Now, I'm going to throw a few thoughts out there. Could a "graffiti" interface tip a user's sanity? Probably not, hopefully not. But, it is, of course, likely to tip them against the tool or product. Personally, I tip against anything I can't use comfortably, and quickly. That's why I like my cell phone but not my VCR, loooove copiers (one big green button) and hate hate hate fax machines (400 tiny buttons that mean nothing to me)! It's also why people still have lots of paper-based processes...they are more familiar and, therefore, easier for them.
So, back to what tips. I'm mostly thinking that an unusable interface that tips users in a negative direction will tip them into the same (proportionately, of course) bad behavior that the graffiti did in the city. What does that mean? It means, problem #1 They will rebel and not use the product you just spent tons of money on, and it will become a rent free shelf squatter for the rest of its life. #2 They will become angry at the product for being lousy and making their lives miserable, the vendor (or internal development team) for building such a lousy product, and the organization for making them use it.
This is all very bad. But, I think it gets worse. Then they talk about it, often, a lot, with many different people. And I'll throw out another "Tipping Point" thought. Gladwell says good size tipping groups are around 150 folks or less. I think this is a reasonable size for a small company using a new time tracking system, an accounting department using a new invoicing system or a team at an external client using your brand new extranet. What does this mean? This means that software applications are a prime target, or opportunity, for tipping internal or external customers.
Now that I think about it, Gladwell's archtypes - connectors, mavens and salesmen - are ripe for software tipping. This is not new, of course. They are our "evangelists" or "power users" or "product champions".
Ok, I think that's it for now. But, I want to think through this a little more. I realize none of it is really new, per say. But I think Gladwell's concepts and insights might be a useful way to view what we do about building user interfaces, and/or managing user satisfaction, if anything. If anyone has an example of software tipping, please post!