Opinion 1: User centered design
“You need to give extensive attention to the needs and wants of the end users. They will determine the success of the website.”
Opinion 2: Client centered design
“You need to sell the website to your client. Persuade him with fancy graphics and make sure he’s satisfied.”
Why I’m pro opinion 1
I believe that user centered design is, in the long term, more beneficial for the developer, the client and the end user.
- The developer is satisfied because he will get recognition for the usable website.
- The client is satisfied because he has a website is being used by his customers.
- The user is satisfied because he enjoys using the website and will keep using it.
The pitfall of user centered design is selling it to the client. When developer A is pitching a usable user centered website and developer B a beautiful unusable flash website: B will win. Simply because people like to look at beautiful things. Visuals provoke emotions in a way that usability can’t.
But when the ‘wow’ moment is over and people have to start working with it, then beautiful doesn’t do justice anymore. That’s why I believe that user centered design is better then client centered design. The only thing that rests is the challenge for developers to convince clients…
Rik van der Kroon
18 March 2007
I am pro gray, not pro black and white.
The thing is that you sell a product to your client, and not to the user of your client. Your client should be the one that knows what his clients wants best.
Example, Philips is making a nice new TV, and they want gray screws with sharp edges, because their research showed they wanted that, then the company who makes the screws shouldn’t think: “Hey, maybe she sharp edges wil hurt Philips employees while assembling”. Because, when Philips receives the screws with smooth edges, they received the wrong product and won’t want to buy it.
It’s in your best interrest to make something your client wants.
Because in the end, the client also knows its own targetgroup.
If the website fails, it’s not your fault, its the fault of the client who okayed the design which failed.
As soon as the client is the user, then you can make a website truly useable.
This is when the website is the main product of the client, but still, you are creating something for the client, and they will choose it.
Not the user.
Therefore, making your product the way your client likes it, minimalistic for a minimalist medicine company, fat and graphic for a fashion company and green and environmental for a hippy company.
rogier
19 March 2007
Thanks for your comment Rik.
But I don’t agree because with web development the problem is that the client doesn’t know what he wants. The web development knowledge of the average client doesn’t reach beyond ‘I think it looks nice’. Usability, accessibility, scalability and many other factors need to be determined by the developer.
Rik van der Kroon
19 March 2007
yes, but that is like selling cars to women. Women don’t care about usability (handling) or accessibility (locations of the dashboard). They care about the color, how they look in it, how it emotes (like a car can express emotions).
That doesn’t matter that the company should make a decent car. Which is usable and accessible, but this is not your sellingpoint in the way that the user is not buying the car because of the great usabillity.
(look at yourself, did you buy MacOSX because it’s so usable? No, because the first few weeks, and still, you are cursing about all the problems you encounter, but damn, it makes you feel good to work on a mac…doesn’t it?)
peterpixel writings » Blog Archive » Ignoring Users when Designing
19 March 2007
[…] The worst thing you can do though, is design for the client. It is an absurd notion that has taken hold of my class lately. I can’t imagine a dumber thing to do. It is like asking the manager of the webshop you are designing what he wants on the site, as opposed to asking the user or looking at the task at hand. Dilbert seems to have experience with this. Anyway you can follow some conversation about Application Centered Design here and Rogier Bikker has a similar post about designing usable interfaces instead of nice looking, unusable applications which please the client. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. […]
Dr. Pete
19 March 2007
It’s refreshing to see that these issues are coming up in the classroom. Coming out of grad school, I definitely wanted to side with the user, but going to an internet start-up, I had to face the lesson of client demands quickly and often. There’s a balance, and it varies with the client. On the one hand, I believe that good service sometimes means protecting the client from themselves, but that has to be done gradually, through education and often compromise. Sometimes you have to give them what they want in the short-term (and lost a battle) to help them see the light in the long-term (and win the war).
Andrew
20 March 2007
You are working for the client, you are designing for both.
Both sets of needs should be mutually compatible if the site is designed well.
The client wants a site that performs well; it is the designers job to give that to him. In order to provide this the user must receive what they want from the site.
Chris James
22 March 2007
Its an interesting discussion and it really does depend on the company as to how the balance shifts.
I happen to work for a small company and I often get frustrated because the client too often dictates the design of a site. The client is making decisions on the design which i know to be wrong, such as fixed height sites with scrolling, content not arranged in a manner which encourages the user to read, etc.
I sometimes even recieve powerpoint presentations, which look shocking, and are terrible in terms of web usability. But the client is the one in power.
I believe when a client goes to a bigger company for a website, I think they would be more willing to listen to what the design company has to say. In our position, we cant really say no to the client (although I have tried to push them!) Also bigger companies can probably feel like they can push thier clients more without it having a huge effect on thier business.
A good analogy is a house being built. I would tell a building firm roughly what i wanted from my house. They would then tell me what would work and what dosnt work, then let them get on with it. I wouldnt tell a builder how to build a house and unfortunately, thats exactly whats happening for the company I work for
Eddie Wilson
22 March 2007
The problems you face when designing for the user vs the client can be solved (in most cases) with defining goals for the project. Before you even think about what a project looks like, or how a project behaves you need to think about the goals of the project.
1. Sell a product?
2. Educate user about services?
3. Provide information about a, b, or c?
Then, in every phase whether design or development, you can always come back to these goals when decisions are made. Does the visual design support the intended goals? Was the content drafted accordingly? Does that client change-request support or go against the projects goals?
Giving the project goals helps keep you on track with designing for the user (since goals always aim to tend to users’ needs), helps to educate the client about what is really important, and gives you a defense when debating certain decisions or change-requests where you feel your client’s personal desires are conflicting with the projects intended goals.
As a designer or a developer it is part of our job to educate the client as to what makes a successful web project. Remember that they are the client and you are the professional. They came to you for your expertise, and you need to act accordingly.
Designing websites to look beautiful is only 1/10 of the equation.
Dennis
14 May 2007
http://www.experientia.com/blog/chi-2007-can-user-centred-design-be-harmful/
A very interesting approach to this subject. You should read it Rogier. Hope you fixxed your little comment problem ; )
dito dodge magnum ac and radio bezel
4 December 2008
44 magnum gun beretta 9000 64 featherweight pre winchester 44 magnum loadslainston house winchester 410 42 model winchester 225 winchester
Bampsyday
8 December 2008
In most cases a product’s rating went down, expanding the range between highest and lowest rated.Unlike Kaspersky, Symantec provides Norton users with little explanation of its features or settings, either in the configuration settings or on its technical support section. Also we don’t like Norton’s dependency on Internet Explorer to explain Help items or services provided by Symantec (windows pop up in IE even when Firefox is your default browser), or that fee-based services have once again crept into the technical support section. Having improved a lot
last year in Symantec’s flagship antivirus product, it makes sense we’d see more modest enhancements for this year’s Norton AntiVirus 2008. While Norton
AntiVirus.
FahOceacytabe
19 December 2008
Hi
As newly registered user i only wanted to say hi to everyone else who uses this board <:-)