Don Norman seems on our minds these days. Those committing or
committed to design research should read his latest contribution to
the discusssion:
http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.html.
I can't fully accept the way he framed his argument. Advances in
technology don't just happen and then get exploited by inventive minds
to eventually generate user interest.
Those who advance technology to the point where it motivates
innovation or invention have responded to some need or desire in their
own experience, recognizing some improvement perhaps that adds to or
perhaps dramatically changes the potential of a technology singly or
in combination with other known capabilities. The inventive mind is
always on the alert for such potentials and, in my view, often ignores
the infrastructure which supports more modest innovations to reach for
the "revolutionary innovation" where no infrastructure yet exists.
The automobile, on Don's list of inventions, began as a mash-up
between new motive technologies as substitutes for the horse to move a
carraige. Many players were involved and many options considered.
There was no single inventor of the automobile. Many people had needs
and desires that allowed them to see the opportunity. Innovations in
roads, brakes, drive mechanisms, etc soon followed and continue to
this day. Users who had previously maintained a horse in a stable soon
found themselves maintaining the automobile in garages.
Infrastructures grow and change. User research didn't lead to the car
as Don points out. It certainly does help make them safer. Don raises
a great range of questions for the future of design thinking,
education and research with his article and it deserves a great deal
of discussion on this list.
|