Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

atheros t1_jdjunbs wrote

A trivial amount of follow-up fixes that.

"Why do you want a faster horse?"
"So that I can get to my destination faster."
"What if I sold a machine that was faster than a horse that could be maintained like a tool rather than an animal?"
"That sounds good so far.."

People are bad at expressing themselves but it's easy to help them.

4

C_bells t1_jdmxig2 wrote

Exactly! When I'm doing research, I design it all so that it's analytical and not literal.

So, if I'm doing a sketching session with people about a pet care app, I have them draw a fantasy physical space that would allow them to provide amazing care for their pets. Then break it down -- are there people there? Is it big or small? Outside or indoors? Etc etc.

You end up getting super interesting elements that could be turned into digital features. Like someone says that in their space, there's a group of friendly pet owners they can talk to. That leads me to realize we should create and test a social component in our app.

I still have other designers complain that sessions like this don't help them directly inform what to make.

But it's like, so you wanted random people to design an app for you? lmao

It's our job to find creative ways to address people's needs. That's literally what good design is.

It doesn't come from a random idea that seems cool, and it doesn't come from directly copying interfaces and features that already exist elsewhere (which is what most people are limited by in terms of ideation).

It's sad that so many people in tech don't think about core needs. It should be the basis of all our work.

2