i do not doubt that personas are a means for something.
i was mainly objecting to your claim that they are not different from a
"jury of actual real consumers." personas have all the limitations of your
own imagination which conversations with "actual real consumers" could
overcome but personas cannot. it is simply illusory to believe that they
would be the same. people can challenge your thinking, personas are
fictions of your own making and they always are conveniently subservient to
their maker.
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: Mattias Arvola [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 2:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Personas: was Design Theories
Just a quick note on personas.
Personas are a means for expression. Just like a sketch. What you are
expressing is who the user
is and what his or her goals are, and together with scenarios or stodyboards
they help focusing on
use of the product rather than focusing on the product per se.
Just like any other models in design they can be used internally as tools
for thought or externally
as means for persuation.
Best regards,
// Mattias
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:05:17 -0500, Klaus Krippendorff
<[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>you say of personas:
>
>It's not different than having a jury of actual real customers there to
>weigh in on the decision making process. This gives the customer a vote.
>
>personas cannot speak.
>they cannot object to what you are thinking because you are thinking for
>them.
>personas may be helpful to imagine a typical user, but they live in your
>imagination, nowhere else and in fact there may not exist a person of the
>kind you imagine.
>personas are no substitutes for competent stakeholders. it is an illusion
>to believe you could do that
>
|