Recently I’ve done a few user interviews via Skype, this has been incredibly useful as I meant that we didn’t have to travel to speak to users in other countries. I’ve done phone interviews before, but using Skype was much better. And it’s not because of the video.

We interviewed some people using video and others with just audio. I found the video interviews distracting, they had the same feel as when you interview with only a list of questions as stimulus. It’s all about eye contact and it feels very earnest, it’s uncomfortable for both sides. 

If this was a face to face situation like this I’d always have some paper stimulus (sketches, diagrams for mapping technology use/social interactions etc.) These help take the attention away from the fact that you are probing into people’s lives, ambitions, desires and let the conversation flow. Having something on the table to point at and discuss, makes things flow much better.

With Skype audio only, we were able to send through these kind of paper documents (in digital form) and talk them through with the users in an uninhibited way. This gave them something to distract them from the questions being asked and start to talk more openly. The conversation seemed to flow a lot easier.

When we did the same thing with video (send files etc) it still became stilted, we were drawn back to the eye contact thing. The stimulus was secondary to the video

So my thoughts at the moment are:

Audio only = awkward

Audio + Video = awkward

Audio + Video + Visual stimulus = better but video distracts in a  bad way, visual stimulus becomes secondary

Audio + Visual stimulus = good. visual stimulus distracts in a good way, just enough to get conversation flowing

If you have any similar experience, leave a comment to share with others

Click to download/open A3 pdf (595k)

I've had this on the go for a while and thought it would be good to share. pdf It's a matrix of Experience Prototyping methods for Service Design. It's in progress of course so I might update it at some point.

Basically it suggests methods of cheap, quick prototyping over a simple service journey and through a number of channels (there could of course be many more, specific to the service). These prototypes should be tested with users (small numbers are best).

I hope it shows how you can prototype 'bigger' experiences than just 'screen' ones, and that you can do it easily, learn fast, iterate and develop your ideas.

Doing this kind of prototyping not only shows you what users like/dislike, find desirable or not, it also shows YOU what it's like to BE the service.

What I wanted to mention was the interactive piece Jon and co. have been working on:
It’s very simple: donated items are tagged with an paper label and RFID tag.

When the scanner is passed over the tag it prompts a video to play.

It’s pretty simple and we’ve seen things like this before. But it’s the combination of the nicely designed equipment, simple interaction and fantastic content that brings it to life.

We scanned Annie Lennox’s dress and saw the video of her holding it and saying where she wore it and how much she liked it etc.

It’s an incredibly emotional experience. The connection between the item in your hand and the narrative really made you want to buy, it makes you want to give money. A good example of how content, form and interaction need to work hand in hand to produce excellent interaction/service experiences.

In the end though, I decided not to buy the dress, green’s not my colour.

Get down there and try it out.
http://www.talesofthings.com/
http://productresearch.dundee.ac.uk/

Thanks to @kandinzky for his example.

Bahyr’s Pret story - a delightful service moment, turned cautionary tale.

Bahyr worked in an large office and went to Pret a Manger (sandwich shop chain, often refered to as 'Pret') on the corner, every morning. He always had a coffee and croissant. This went on for several months. One morning the girl who served him every day pushed his money back over the counter and said “don’t worry about it”. [We assume here, she has authority to sometimes ‘treat’ regular customers to free stuff, as an informal loyalty reward] Bahyr thought she was giving it to him for free because she thought he couldn’t afford it. It was the surprise that made him respond in this way. So he pushed his money back at her and insisted on paying.

On getting into the office he told a colleague about the experience and the colleague said: “She’s probably allowed to do that occasionally; to treat regular customers”. Bahyr then realised his misinterpretation of the event and felt a bit stupid. The next day, and for the next few months, he couldn’t go into that Pret as he felt embarrassed that he had misunderstood the situation. So the 'free breakfast' gesture backfired in a big way.

It probably should have been framed more clearly:
“Since your a regular, we’d (not- I’d) like you to have this one on us” might have worked better.

I like this example as it shows how a supposedly 'delightful' event excuted in slightly the wrong way can backfire and lose you customers.

So my advice to service providers and designers would be "Be careful, be very careful, but don't stop trying".

Serviced apartment

At the moment I’m living in a ‘serviced apartment’ while the my flat's bathroom is ripped apart. It’s pretty nice in a ‘modern living’ way (yes, that’s a real term people use). Anyway, after being there for 8 days I wondered why the cleaner hadn’t been in. It wasn’t too dirty but we needed new towels and linen. So I rang the agency who own the flat and asked one of their “service-orientated professionals” [sic] why the flat hadn’t been cleaned. He looked it up and freaked out: “it was scheduled in for yesterday” he said. Let me look into it and call you back in a couple of minutes. He called back very quickly and was very apologetic:
- “they’ll be there in 5 minutes! We’re very sorry, cant a apologise enough.”
me: “err, ok, but it's 4:45, it’s a bit late?”
Them: “they be 5 minutes!”
me” “o...k... How long will it take”
them: “good question, I’ll find out. (asks colleague). About half an hour you don’t have to be in the flat”
me: “fine, thanks for your help”

So, after a couple of minutes of flapping about, I got out of the flat. I didn’t want to hang around when flustered cleaners were coming. I actually saw them come in with a big bag of towels etc, as I was leaving.

After 45 minutes sitting in the spring sunshine I wandered back to the flat just in time to see them the cleaners bundling all their bags and stuff into a taxi (not their usual form of transport, I assume).

I think what happened here is:
the company did the right thing, they apologised, took responsibility and got the problem fixed very quickly.
But... that caused another problem, it inconvenienced me. I’d have been happy to have the cleaners come the next morning. But I ended up having to wander the streets for 45 minutes.
They never quite gave me the chance to say it wasn't convenient. And I got to the point where I thought, “well, at least it’s getting done”

So great customer service (quick response) can become bad customer service (inconvenient) if it’s forced upon us.

But I suppose I have clean towels and I got 45 minutes of Clerkenwell sunshine and Angry birds.

Service Touchpoints and the Uncanny Valley from Rory Hamilton on Vimeo.

Presentation I gave at LightningUX London in Feb 2011

Erik Roscam Abbing's new book, Brand Driven Innovation contains a case study of a co-design project I did at the Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art a few years about (with Live|work).

I haven't read the whole book yet, but looks good. It's in the same series as Kathryn Best's excellent Design Management.

Good to see the Baltic story being used and still seems fresh and relevant.

http://www.branddriveninnovation.com/

I'll try to post my thoughts on that project soon. It was one of my favourite projects. Worked on it with Sean, Natalie and Murray. And of course all the Baltic crew.

One of the techniques I was ranting about was Experience Prototyping. I think this is the best way to find out what it's like to "be the service", it stops everything being so abstract and gives you direct feedback on what could go wrong and how to start delivering a service which is as fully formed a possible.

I'll blog more about the project when it's been published/presented but for now take a look at this short experience prototype video. Notice how even though it's only made up of touchpoints created from cardboard and text messages (and an existing car and car park) the users take it very seriously and are genuinely delighted when thinks work well.

Experience Prototyping for the Share the Road project. from Emma Dyer on Vimeo.

The team was: Emma Boswell, Emma Dyer, Andy Millar, Richard Baffoe & John Miller

Some of the team watching a GPS tracking feedback animation.

"To carry out research into the needs of the consumer and into the ability of machine [industry] to meet those needs, and from this research to evolve types of design which are not only suitable for machine production, but at the same time efficient and beautiful."

Now, this was written in 1943, so why are we still having to coax and cajole companies into listening to their users?

You might say, all they meant was traditional market research (quant) and that's not always the best way to create new innovative design. But I think is is significant that they shared offices with the Mass Observation, a UK Government organisation which from 1937 to 1960 recorded everyday life in Britain through recording "conversation and behaviour at work, on the street" and asking a huge number of the public to keep diaries. (see the http://www.massobs.org.uk archive if you want to know more.)

Why do we have to work so bloody hard to get people to listen to their customers? If they could write such a confident and forward thinking manifesto in the 1940's why cant we now?

I've never worked on a single project where doing some user insight has not added hugely to the vitality, progress and success of the project. No I'm off down the Anderson shelter as I can hear the corporate air raid siren.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Design Research Unit, a multidisciplinary design practice, was responsible over 30 years for designing some of the iconic brands of the UK, including British Rail, Westminster street nameplate, and large parts of the festival of Britain.

Design Research Unit: 1942 - 72 is on in the Cubitt Gallery, London till Sunday 24th Oct before touring the UK cubittartists.org.uk  It's a great little show, go and see it if you can.

more photos on Flickr

I've been working a lot in France recently, doing workshops etc for Orange/France Telecom. It's been a lot of fun, and hard work. One of the things the French ask me when they first meet me at these workshops is: "Oh, are you the animator?" or "Will you be animating the workshop?" At first I found this amusing especially as I do some drawn animation in my spare time: link.

But when I asked about the use of the word, I found it is used as we would use "Facilitator". So I was there to "animate" the workshop.

I've grown to really like this term  and now use it more and more in English to describe the activity of running design workshops. I seems to me that facilitation is too passive a word for what we do as designers in workshops with clients and users. Facilitating feels a bit like opening doors for people, handing them pens etc. But to animate a room of people you need to give them confidence, not just pens. I can be doing micro coaching, counselling and sketching lessons all in one session with the group and individuals.
For me animating is about bringing things to life, whether that is a group of jaded (undead) attendees or the ideas themselves.

I'm sure many of us try not to say they are "facilitating". I'm not suggesting we call ourselves animators but we can use the word to describe what we're going to do. So can I suggest that we start to describe what we do in workshops as "animating" (might need some explanation) and see ourselves as "Animators of workshops and ideas". It seems more descriptive and it feels more exciting.

So, get animating!