Software Dev

Do Designers deserve a “seat at the strategy table”?

One of my favorite “design” bloggers out there is Josh Porter of Bokardo. In his most recent article, Josh contends that “designers need a place at the strategy table because their work depends on and is a direct result of it. If it’s not already, realizing the business strategy of the organization in an interface should be the designer’s primary job description.”

If you’ve ever given a designer a “we’re happy with how it works, just pretty it up” job (whether it’s a web site or a word doc), you need to read this article. Preferably right now (I’ll wait).

Unfortunately, I think Josh is overestimating both strategists ( “…off using terms like “conversion”, “user-generated content”, and “ROI”” ) and designers ( “…opining about “grid-based design”, “cross-browser rendering”, or “web standards”” ).

I’ve thrown out the idea in the past (and it tends to piss off a bunch of web designers): stunning visual design (as most people define it) isn’t very compatible with usability and usually only a coincidental relationship with lofty things like “business strategy”. Designers’ brains (and the brains of the people who hire them) simply aren’t wired that way.

Don’t believe me? Take this simple test to see if you’re thinking about design in the wrong way:

  • If you’re a designer: Open up your portfolio. If you don’t have a portfolio, pull up a mental picture of the last one you had. What does it look like? Lots of screenshots, no? Next to each screenshot, do you talk about the business goals of the client/employer? Do you talk about how the design performed after launch? Do you know how the design performed after launch? Do you CARE how the design performed after launch? Answer that last question honestly– of COURSE you care how it performed, but was acquiring that knowledge a higher priority for you than your next pixel-slinging / xhtml-wrangling task?
  • If you’ve hired a designer: Look at the last time or two you’ve hired a designer. What type of person did you hire? Why did you choose that designer over the alternatives? Did you ask about business strategy? Did you ask about post-design performance metrics?
  • Bonus question for non-designers: Have you ever thought or said, “If I was only better at Photoshop and/or Illustrator and/or XHTML/CSS/JavaScript, I could do this myself.”?

Maybe– hopefully– you are the exception to the rule.

What stands in the way of making things better?

Unfortunately, things aren’t likely to change soon. There are a few attitudes that stand in the way:

  • Designers need to stop thinking and acting like artists and start acting like scientists. I’m honestly not sure this is possible.
  • Non-designers need to stop thinking that they are good at crafting user experiences. Don’t get me wrong– they should certainly have an opinion, voice ideas, express concerns, etc. I’m not saying that they should shut up and let the expert do their job… They just need to realize that it’s possible to BE an expert.
  • Everyone need to be willing to sacrifice pretty and sacrifice “cool”. At my last job (the only time I haven’t been self-employed in the last decade), the product team united around a user experience to create a public “resume”. It was a gorgeous multi-step experience with a few inline “wizards”. Users could edit their public profile after the fact in a seamless inline manner while viewing their profile (imagine lots of “edit” links next to editable data). The team loved it. The CEO gushed. The designer was proud. The users, however, were confused as hell.
  • Non-designers need to hire designers with the right attitudes and reward the right successes. If both parties think the designer’s job is done when they hear, “Wow– that’s beautiful”, then there’s a problem.

I love pretty much everything Josh is proposing, but I’ve only met a tiny handful of designers who have the discipline to purposefully make something LESS PRETTY and LESS COOL to make it more effective. And I know even fewer product managers who have the discipline to ask them to.

Facebook and Misaligned Goals

Facebook’s goals and your goals (as a Facebook user) are starting to get misaligned. And it’s only going to get worse. I’ll come back to this in a sec.

Alan (former VP at my previous employer) has left Facebook. He brings up a lot of cogent reasons why.

For myself, I am a bit frustrated with Facebook. I receive a pile of “notifications”, “facebook mail” and (increasingly) “sponsored crap” every week, quite a bit of it quite deceptive in its desperate bid for virality (yeah, I know virality isn’t a word). Notes that say “John would like to see what you’re reading”, “Bob wants to know what your stripper name is”, and “Alex has posted some . Click here to view them!”… All of these things lead straight to the “install this app” screen that I’ve visited a hundred times.

We’ve all done it. Responded to these “personal” invites as if they really were personal invites (I have 6 iLike invitations from people who I’m SURE aren’t really that interested in getting me to use iLike), installed the application only to remove it a week later when you realize it doesn’t do a damn thing that actually adds value to your life.

I’d like to find the setting in Facebook where I can check a checkbox that says, “I would like to find what applications I want to install on my own, thank you!” (Can you find that option in the picture below? Am I missing a setting somewhere?)

FB

So back to misaligned goals. One of my problems with free consumer apps is that the goals of the business are virtually NEVER aligned with the goals of the user. In the beginning of a startup (like Facebook), this doesn’t come into play. The business is 100% focused on adding value to the user. The user wants to get stuff done (share ideas, photos, communicate, whatever) and the business is desperately trying to help them reach these goals as effectively as possible.

Unfortunately, pretty soon the business runs out of easy ways to add value for the user. The growth curve slows down, and you start hearing people on the product team saying, “We want the users to…” more than “Our users want…”. And it’s about this time that investors are starting to look at the burn rate and wonder how the business is going to extract value from the user. With free services like Facebook, you have a few options… I’d imagine that they’ve functionally killed their virtual gift business by releasing a public platform like they have. So that leaves advertising or premium services. Unfortunately, I haven’t heard a whisper of premium services from Facebook.

The funny thing is, users really aren’t too keen on advertising, no matter how targeted they are. And with a high use-per-day app like Facebook, they become downright invisible to the users. Quite a few people have noted that FB advertising is pretty painfully ineffective. Which means that the business needs to make ads more plentiful, more invasive, or more expensive… All of which have pretty serious negative ramifications for the user. And because EVENTUALLY there is a drive for constant revenue growth at consumer facing web startups, where else can they turn? Of course, you could argue that Facebook, with their new ad platform, have a better understanding of their users that just about anyone (in terms of demographics and intent)… But between the ad blindness that is a huge problem on utility-style apps (when was the last time you read an ad in Gmail? How about clicked on one?) and because Facebook is built on trust of your NETWORK, I think the “but Facebook advertising can be sooooo targeted!” argument doesn’t hold up.

Take any free consumer site that’s more 5 years old and you see how ugly this slippery slope can get. Interstitial ads, Flash ads that obscure the content of the site, pay-per-click garbage, and more. If Facebook doesn’t start looking in other directions, this is where they’ll be in a year or two– trying to manipulate their users into clicking on (or viewing a lot of) ads.

RescueTime Blog

Brief note to let my dear readers know that we’ve set up a blog for RescueTime. Right not it’s not that active, but will eventually contain lots of interesting things that we can learn from our anonymous users. By asking them a few questions, we’ll be able to look at how productivity differs by gender, age, industry, and more.

For now, we’ll tide you over with a long-n-wordy case study on our permissions marketing campaign and a link to my appearance on Dave Mason’s syndicated radio show. Good fun!

Mutual Awe

The best teams I’ve ever worked on have had a peculiar vibe of “mutual awe”. When I saw what my colleagues could pull off, I was dazzled. When I pulled off something cool, THEY were dazzled.

At the same time, I think it’s tremendously valuable to be a hobbyist in the areas where your partners are experts. I’ll never be a programmer, but I’ll always dabble– it helps me know what CAN be done. I’ll never be a salesguy (though I’ve been one), but I read books on how to sell. I’ll never be a writer, but I like to read about the art/science of writing good copy.

One of the blog entries that has stuck with me for a while is Guy Kawasaki’s post on workplace assholes (it even comes with a handy self-exam! (Are YOU one? Uh-oh. Am *I* one?!).

The main reason that the post/test stuck with me was one of the characteristics of workplace assholedom is this belief:

“I could do your job better than you’re doing.”

I’ve already sung the praises of small teams, but I’ll add this to the heap. The smaller the team, the greater to potential for mutual respect and/or awe. The larger the team, the greater the likelihood that SOMEONE on the team is thinking (or even saying) that they could make better design/coding/sales/biz decisions than the person who is currently making them.

Ironically, the larger the team, the greater the likelihood that they might be right.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  Scroll to top