|
The responsibility of an UI/UX team is to provide different options to answer a particular UX/UI requirement.
Instead of working on equally good multiple options , they make option A super cool & make option B,C,. totally pathetic, so that the people reviewing the options, all heap up quick towards A & scream. "Lets go with A!, A.A..A!!"
But when the UX team provides equally good alternate options i.e A,B,C, it is usually followed by a loong debate. The UX guys usually team up and have a pre-conceived idea that a particular option is the best and think that non-UX guys, even including the reviewers as dumb folks without any UX sense.
So to cut down the lengthy arguments with any non-UX guys, they've started following this A,b,c strategy now  .
Now I've started spotting out this pattern, And I've replied them back. "A is all fine, but can't we get a chance to see a review-worthy B,C"?  
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
modified 12-Sep-17 7:45am.
|
|
|
|
|
Here, we don't leave the UX/UI in the hands of those who do that type of thing "professionally".
The only way to make it work right is to have the developer force the cretins users into not screwing things up too badly. All the fun/pretty in the world won't make up for elephanted data.
We'd never UX/UI anything like a ribbon bar.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
We all do it. We put more work into our favored approach than we do the alternative(s). The best way to mitigate the problem is to have a team (or person) assigned to each idea, and (monetarily) reward the team whose idea wins the review.
Of course, each idea would have to be weighed against appropriate metrics, such as ease of use, upstream or downstream impact on already implemented code, downstream impact on code yet to be designed, and things like that.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: and (monetarily) reward
In general, this has brought more problems in our teams. People started fighting over the decisions to award a particular team/individual's ideas. Later this moved into some "points" systems. So that people all forgets why & how someone got those points and dont start any fights on table right after a particular announcements were made. Later , towards the end of the year, they'd be able to redeem it as a voucher or something.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: A,b,c strategy now
Pretty common practice, human psychology and all that. But I like the idea of employing that to cut down on meeting time, personal opinion (UI/UX is all opinion, IMO  ), arguments, etc.
I wish our candidates for office had this clarity. But no. It's a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: But no. It's a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
I blame the rise of the HTML/JavaScript/CSS UI for this.
Back when our only options consisted of desktop apps with labels, text fields, buttons, radio buttons, listviews, tree controls, toolbars, status bars, tooltips and little more, our design options were much more limited, and as a result we didn't waste much time on UIs, and got things done.
Everybody knew what to expect, and we didn't run into the usability issues of "modern" UIs that are now finally being acknowledged (I wish I could find the link to that article from just a few days ago).
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's the one.
"Modern", "Metro", "flat"...it's all the same to me. All in the name of touch screens. It's all Steve Jobs' fault.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: "Modern", "Metro", "flat"..
I dread these words.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
I wish we trusted the UI/UX people here. Instead they put in hours to create a review worthy A, B, and C only to be told that the color scheme which matches the approved palette. The reply is that the person in charge of the project really likes a particular shade of purple, so base everything off of that. 
The alternative to this is "We're used to the old design from two decades ago. So can you make it more like that? Yes, we understand that it will look terrible, double our process time, and never look right on a mobile interface, but we're used to it." 
|
|
|
|
|
RJOberg wrote: and never look right on a mobile interface
I hate it when some idiot in management dictates that a full-blown desktop app "look just like the mobile version" (or vice versa). No matter which direction we're talking about, the UI suffers on BOTH platforms because of the limitations imposed by attempting to do that.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: they make option A super cool
They are unleashing one of the many cognitive biases as a weapon upon others.
Confirmation bias - Wikipedia[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: The responsibility of an UI/UX team is to provide different options to answer a particular UX/UI requirement.
Instead of working on equally good multiple options , they make option A super cool & make option B,C,. totally pathetic, so that the people reviewing the options, all heap up quick towards A & scream. "Lets go with A!, A.A..A!!"
That description sounds like the situation where a UX designer, not implementer, should be in place.
Especially since that should be part of requirements gathering and not implementation.
Vunic wrote: Now I've started spotting out this pattern, And I've replied them back. "A is all fine, but can't we get a chance to see a review-worthy B,C"?
Why are you in the process at all? Are you the architect, product owner or customer?
Or is perhaps the current process is that other developers are being asked to provide an opinion?
Perhaps it would be better to look into one of the UI demo tools rather than looking for actual implementations. The tools provide the ability to interact with the UI being targeted.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you have "corporate" on your mind.
In a start up, everybody is given a chance to look at things and provide feedback.
But still we got some clear boundaries defined. Developers can't take the final call when it comes to UX.
It's UX/UI team that takes the final call, but only when there's nobody on the top (Directors, Product manager) veto-ing it down.
We don't actually drag something for days. We sit and debate for hours usually if there are equal alternates and we got two blocks of people supporting alternate options. We quickly break the arguments into data points, do the merits/demerits table and drop the one that has more demerits.
This could be on different levels of requirement. Some are as tiny as a logo design. Some are on Customer interaction flow, which is core of a product. Some are on the advertisements/campaign making etc.
Its a pretty interesting stuff. We all love to take part in.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: In a start up, everybody is given a chance to look at things and provide feedback.
Yes I have worked in many start ups. In the last 15 years every company I have worked at (5 or 6) has been a start up.
However one must still differentiate between design and implementation especially when that is what is going on. Especially in a start up.
The description of your situation is that someone (or several) are implementing several examples and then seeking input on those examples even though one is only fully implemented. Where implemented is the key word there.
The primary problem is that if one is fully implemented then, generally for a startup, one shouldn't encourage the cost of doing the other implementations anyways. The general layout often will not matter. If someone considers that it does matter, either in some or all of the cases, and one doesn't want to use a demo only tool then one should use whiteboarding to layout several designs, keep it within an hour or so, and then implement the result of that.
Vunic wrote: We don't actually drag something for days. We sit and debate for hours usually if there are equal alternates and we got two blocks of people supporting alternate options.
In a start up that sounds like a problem especially if it is going on all the time. Either there is no leader or they are not doing their job. For a moderately sized UI most views should be self evident. Less than 10% should have enough complexity that more than one presentation is even likely (much less needing a decision.)
Vunic wrote: Its a pretty interesting stuff. We all love to take part in
But keep in mind there is a cost. Every developer sitting in on those meetings is not doing something else to get the product ready for rollout.
|
|
|
|
|
What comes first is the concept, then the wire frame, then the theme, & finally the implementation.
We get to choose between options in most of these stages.
And UX guys what we got at the moment, I believe they are one of the quickest ones around.
What gets chosen finally , only will get into implementation, Yup nobody can afford to try multiple "implementation".
jschell wrote: But keep in mind there is a cost. Every developer sitting in on those meetings is not doing something else to get the product ready for rollout.
"Meetings" I dread this word. It's a general curse in the corporate world too, i.e irrelevant people sitting in irrelevant meetings.
There is NO meeting in our teams, unless there's a genuine need. We just circulate the contents through slack. Anybody can open the docs and provide their feedback. By no means, they can point to this voluntary participation in reviews , as a reason for a delay in their actual deliverables. Things are pretty straight forward and easy for the team to understand. 99% of the folks never needed any teaching on how they've to save time & be efficient etc.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: What comes first is the concept, then the wire frame, then the theme, & finally the implementation.
We get to choose between options in most of these stages.
Then I must be missing something because I don't know how one of those stages can produce something where one option is objectively better but yet the others would be just as good if something else were done to them. Excluding of course that one option just is better (thus the 'implementation' of each stage is not the differentiating factor.)
Vunic wrote: There is NO meeting in our teams,
Each developer is still spending time.
|
|
|
|
|
All of our collective powers - can we not stop this horrible nauseating disgusting and despicable trend wherein one reads a (news) report of some sort and they say things like:
" _______ tweeted . . . " or "_______ posted on their FaceBook page"
and similar insane citations?
Any solutions to stopping the growing din of the intellectual flushing sound?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
If only!
The full template is - "X tweeted Y about Z and now here's an op-ed piece about how we suffer from an era of soundbite politics."
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
I tweeted about this the other day.
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Any solutions to stopping the growing din of the intellectual flushing sound?
What intelligence? All I hear is the flushing. So no solution, because people sh*t. Technology only gives them other ways to sh*t, other than through their a**.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is:
The internet has put the power in the hands of the people. So now those who used to control everything are in a struggle to remain relevant.
|
|
|
|
|
No - they can higher all the posters they need for whatever need they want.
Russia and China (&etc.) haven't wasted this opportunity to fool those gullible enough to think they've gained control.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
