Jenifer,
Thank you for providing your insider-informed and well-reasoned
perspective.
I'd like to respond to this remark you made about my earlier post:
On Mar 22, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Jenifer Tidwell wrote:
The point about hill-climbing with
data-driven incremental changes is well taken, but honestly, don't
you think
that It Would Be Bad to accidentally send Google Web Search into a
design
valley while you blundered about looking for a higher hill?
By my comments (reproduced below), I didn't mean that a company should
leap blindly off their current hill in hopes of landing on a higher
one. My point was that "over-reliance" on data-driven incremental
changes would be ill-advised, as would choices made "solely on the
basis of performance data".
I advocated "a smart combination of analytical thinking and design
thinking" to better climb the current hill and also search for taller
mountains.
The post by my former colleague Tom Chi that dave malouf cited makes
that same point and more. It's at http://www.ok-cancel.com/comic/177.html
.
Also, like several others who have commented on this topic, I was not
referring specifically to Google, but rather to the practice of web
design wherever it takes place.
Larry Tesler
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Larry Tesler wrote:
Yes, over-reliance on data-driven incremental design (DDID) is ill-
advised.
- Customers who use more than one of a company's products tend to be
the most valuable customers in the long run. DDID usually optimizes
one product at a time. The resulting inconsistencies may make each
product a bit more profitable but can make it less likely for a
heavy user of one to become a casual user of another.
- DDID is an effective way to climb a little higher on a profit
hill. It will never get you off the current hill onto a taller
mountain.
- Changing shades of blue and line widths can nudge a product higher
on its current hill. But an organization that makes choices based
solely on the basis of performance data won't learn why a certain
shade or width works better, and is unlikely to apply the lesson to
the next project. Revenue is foregone, costs mount and precious
resources are tied up while each new product is gradually optimized.
But many managers love DDID. It a systematic, replicable, and
inherently measurable. Delight in the experience and passion for the
product line are much harder to measure. The non-mathematical way
that designers go about evoking such emotions isn't something that
the staffing and training departments can reliably replicate.
These days, great success usually emerges from a smart combination
of analytical thinking and design thinking, a combination that
requires mutual respect and cooperation as equals among the various
practitioners.
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
