[HN Gopher] Universal Design Guide Playbook
___________________________________________________________________
Universal Design Guide Playbook
Author : marban
Score : 91 points
Date : 2023-08-24 09:05 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (universaldesignguide.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (universaldesignguide.com)
| lastdong wrote:
| Brilliant resource, IMO. There's a lot of activities, you pick
| the ones (if any) that suits your requirements. Honestly, if you
| cannot see the value of brainstorming an idea, and you never done
| it before, not sure if you fully understand people. These
| activities can be prepared in a way that are well informed and
| take more or less time. I tend to see them as good additions if
| everyone understands the value it brings. What I've came to see
| is that sometimes people disagree, but are proven differently
| later in the process (at that point, it meant going back and re-
| think all the initial assumptions).
| mercurialsolo wrote:
| There's also design centric firms like Airbnb where it does have
| a seat at the business table. But largely design doesn't get a
| seat at the table is because the practice hasn't embraced
| experimentation and science to quantify business outcomes on an
| ongoing basis. E.g. what is the cost of reducing user complexity
| in a large system if it's human assisted and you can train
| individuals to a workflow - some of these have long term business
| impact e.g. opens up ways for a younger competitor with a better
| designed product.
|
| Also given that design is largely exposed via the interface it
| becomes that what works can be easily copied over by a competitor
| - think Threads vs X.
|
| If we can bring in design to think through on business problems
| through the consumer adoption and behaviour change lens - it sure
| will have a much bigger impact than it does today.
|
| Also see some other meta aspects at play - e.g. design is very
| subjective at the moment and everyone has a choice to what "works
| for them is good design" .
| designistfun wrote:
| Your statement assumes product and engineering quantify
| business outcomes. Every feature, update, code refactor, etc.
| Always quantified!
|
| Design is as easily copied as anything else. I'm sure you know
| about business models. Yep--never copied!
|
| Everything is subjective. Every company is doing everything in
| a manner that "works for them".
| JimDabell wrote:
| I'm a bit lost here - what is this? I see a bunch of boxes for
| activities like getting a group of people to do their favourite
| stretches in a circle, or throwing paper balls into a bin. What
| does this have to do with design? I think I'm missing the point.
| The headline "Supporting the development of inclusive
| innovations" doesn't really say anything.
| [deleted]
| julienreszka wrote:
| Nowhere it mentions "profit"
|
| Disregarded
| [deleted]
| ranting-moth wrote:
| This could have done with better design.
| say_it_as_it_is wrote:
| [flagged]
| sherjilozair wrote:
| So this is why my previous company had taken us to a retreat
| where we tried to brainstorm how to build AGI using post-it
| notes. We were given 5 minutes and then someone did a crude
| clustering and picked the biggest cluster.
| JakeAl wrote:
| Form follows function. You only need to include that which is
| necessary to solve the problem defined by your problem
| definition/statement.
| robflaherty wrote:
| I know the intent is good (it is!) but this common notion that
| good design is a toolbox of fun little games really prevents the
| design function from getting taken more seriously. In the
| business world at least it ensures our seat at the kid's table.
| _proofs wrote:
| while i appreciate the comment about games, i think it is worth
| considering the relationship between creativity and ego, and
| what happens when you take yourself, and your ideas, too
| seriously.
|
| john gleese has a great take on creativity which i believe to
| be a fair criticism of what happens when you take yourself too
| seriously in business.
| noduerme wrote:
| What about when you infantilize your employees and implicitly
| insult their intelligence by having them do exercises
| designed for 3rd graders? Is that the time to top it off with
| criticism for them taking themselves too seriously?
| gochi wrote:
| The dramatic reaction to doing group activities like
| stretching being viewed as an "insult" indicates that
| person has a very low emotional IQ. So yes, that's a great
| time to get them to stop taking themselves too seriously!
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| None of these exercises were designed for third graders
| tjpnz wrote:
| In the companies I've worked where it was taken seriously it
| had more of a Human Factors/HCI bent. You would come to them
| for accessibility and user studies, and stay for the pretty UI
| and design system.
| cheschire wrote:
| In my opinion this is impacted heavily by the average career
| length in the room. This isn't an age thing, but more of an
| expertise thing.
|
| Once a person approaches and crosses that 10,000 hour mark,
| they no longer struggle to articulate their motivations and
| needs the way that a person at the 2,000 hour mark would.
|
| I find this type of design playbook to be very useful when the
| average experience in the room is on the lower end. On the
| upper end of the experience spectrum (30,000+ hours), I've
| found it tends to turn more into facilitating a group therapy
| session. There's still room for activities and exercises but I
| use them sparingly.
|
| I should also mention that I prefer to approach the extreme
| ends of the experience spectrum in separate engagements.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-26 23:02 UTC)