Ask Eric: Questions & Answers

October 29, 2008 – submitted by Jill Fruchter of Brooklyn, NY

Question: How does this PET design course relate to someone currently enrolled in the CUA certification program? The CXA up-sell language makes the CUA certification seem obsolete. I have taken the first CUA course and am enrolled for the Design course that is being offered in a few weeks. Is there any plan to have courses from one program count toward the other? As you say, "usability is no longer enough." How are these two programs (CUA, CXA) so different? I won't be able to afford both certifications, and it seems that maybe the CUA certification should just be expanded vs. kept as a mutually exclusive entity. Help?

Eric's response: I can help!

The PET Design skill set is an extension to the foundation of classic usability, which is the topic of the CUA™ programs. Every company and every person involved in user experience design MUST have this foundation. Classic usability is the core of user experience design. If a user can't find it, the user can't be persuaded by it!

The CXA™ program that I am working on now is an extension to the foundation of classic usability. We see the transition to user experience design as going beyond making things that people can use easily. We are looking at the design issues more strategically; by participating in business positioning and new product ideation. We are engineering persuasion and ensuring that advanced communication methods work. We are applying our skills to a wider set of environments and products. And we are operating in an "industrial strength" mode, using advanced methods and tools to manage the amount of user centered work companies need today.

So get your foundation. And look forward to the profound ways our field is growing.

July 9, 2008 – submitted by Sudha P. of India

Question: Hi, I will shortly be working on a project which involves migration from a mainframe to a GUI-based system.Can you suggest some reading or guidelines to be kept in mind while doing the same.

Eric's response: Wow. Mainframe to GUI is a pretty old problem. Have not seen a mainframe in some time...

The most critical insight is that it is easy to make the design WORSE when you transition to a GUI. If you simply port the mainframe interface into the GUI container you will get no real positive benefits, but incur challenges with the added overhead of window manipulation.

To make the transition positive requires taking advantage of the added capabilities of a GUI. Use the benefits of windows, mice, pulldowns, direct manipulation, etc. So you really have to re-architect the interface.

June 19, 2008 – submitted by Dilip Yava of Ahmedabad, India

Question: Is there any website that gives awards for best usability? Like thefwa.com for favorite website award of flash sites.

I have gone through lots of stuff on your Web site and have read the article published in the Business world. Great stuff!! very interesting and thought provoking.

Eric's response: There are primarily awards for POOR usability. ("Sites that suck" is now a cliche.)

But I do like your idea. The only challenge is that a site should be good ergonomically in the context of a set of business objectives, user profiles, and scenarios. If you just look at a site without this context, then you can't really tell if it's good or not.

We had one financial site where the government forced our client to provide free reports. The business objective did not suggest easy-to-get reports. A "poor" ergonomic design, with lots of steps, would actually be appropriate!

In persuasion design I am constantly finding examples where you may have to design a less efficient interface in order to create specific reactions (like engagement). So how do we handle that???

But the idea of an award might be good... We will think about this :)

January 24, 2008 – submitted by Phil Maclin of IL, USA

Question: Hello Dr. Eric. I hope I'm in the right place. I'm not a developer, but an IT business analyst and I'm managing a major software rollout that will be a big change to the status quo process for all of our users. We've purchased a CRM package that allows us to do some custom development but we're at a place where we need to decide whether to develop for certain requirements from within the CRM application's framework or develop outside of it (perhaps .Net) and integrate. We're 51/49 in favor of doing it outside because of flexibility but I want to make sure all of the bases are covered.

My question is this: What are the types of questions I need to ask in order to make the most educated and objective recommendation possible and get everyone involved?

Things like comparing the development time of the two options and integration issues and perhaps cost are some of the questions that come to mind. What am I missing here?

Please forgive me if this question does not apply to usable interface design.

Eric's response: Sure, this is the right place.

There are, as you point out, issues of cost and development time. All things equal COTS (commercial off the shelf) software is faster and cheaper to install. But the usability issue is the other side of the issue.

The real question is to see what the users actually need. If you define this FIRST, then you can consider the best way to get it implemented. Otherwise you are just guessing. SO we recommend STARTING with an analysis of the user needs. Then the decision about method of implementation can be properly informed.