Genius Design


The fourth major design approach is something I call genius design. Genius design relies almost solely on the wisdom and experience of the designer to make design decisions. Designers use their best judgment as to what users want and then design the product based on that judgment. User involvement, if it occurs at all, comes at the end of the process, when users test what the designers have made to make sure it really works as the designer has predicted.

Compared to the rigor of the other three approaches, genius design seems almost cavalier. Yet this is how most interaction design is done today, either by choiceApple, supposedly for security reasons, does no user research or testing at allor by necessity. Many designers work in organizations that don't provide funding or time for research, so the designers are left to their own devices.

This is not to say that designers who practice genius design don't consider usersthey do. It's simply that the designers either don't have the resources or the inclination to involve users in the design process. Designers use their personal knowledge (and frequently the knowledge of the organization they're working for and research from others) to determine users' wants, needs, and expectations.

Genius design can create some impressive designs, such as Apple's iPod (Figure 2.5). It can also create some impressive failures, such as Apple's first handheld device, the Newton. Aside from market forces (not an inconsiderable factor), the success of genius-designed products rests heavily on the skill of the designer. Thus, genius design is probably best practiced by experienced designers, who have encountered many different types of problems and can draw upon solutions from many past projects. It probably also works best when the designer is one of the potential users, although this status can be a serious trap as well. The designers who created the Windows 95 operating system probably considered themselves the users, but while they understood how the OS worked perfectly well, ordinary users suffered. Because of their intimate understanding of how the product or service they designed was created and their inside knowledge of the decisions behind it, the designers will know much more about the functionality of the product or service than will most end users.

Figure 2.5. Apple's iPod was created using genius design by designers such as Jonathan Ive.

courtesy of Apple Computer, Inc


Unfortunately, while genius design is best practiced by experienced designers, it's often attempted by inexperienced designers. Many designers use this approach because it is, frankly, easier than the other three. It requires a lot less effort to noodle on a whiteboard than it does to research users or artfully assemble the components of a system. And while I am loathe to tell anyone not to trust their instincts, designers should practice genius design with care, for instincts can be dead wrong.

Genius design has many strengths, however, especially for an experienced designer. It's a fast and personal way to work, and the final design, perhaps more than with the other approaches, reflects the designer's own sensibilities. It is also the most flexible approach, allowing designers to focus their efforts where they see fit. By following their own muses, designers may be able to think more broadly and innovate more freely.




Designing for Interaction(c) Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices
Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices
ISBN: 0321432061
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2006
Pages: 110
Authors: Dan Saffer

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net