Automating Design Processes for Teams: An IDEO Case Study
4 likes726 views
The document discusses how IDEO integrated a bot into their design team to automate design processes, emphasizing the importance of combining qualitative and behavioral data to better understand user needs. It highlights the evolution of transportation and potential future scenarios with self-driving cars, while addressing the balance of desirability, feasibility, and viability in design thinking. Additionally, it raises ethical questions regarding automation and its impact on human design interactions.
Automating Design Processes for Teams: An IDEO Case Study
- 1. How we introduced a bot to our design team OCTOBER, 2017 Automating Design Processes: An IDEO Case Study
- 2. TESTING WITH MANY USERS We’re always looking for smart ways to learn more in less time. This mentality has led our researchers to push the boundaries of the data we can record in our research process. Alongside the qualitative data we gather from interviews, we also pull together behavioural data collected over longer time periods. We might record someone’s steps per day, or the route they take to work, in order to find insights into the patterns of everyday. What do people really do? MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 2 UX AT SCALE
- 3. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 3 Quantifying effectiveness Observing behaviour New inspiration UX AT SCALE MORE PEOPLE IN HIGHER FIDELITY OVER LONGER PERIODS OF TIME
- 4. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 4 With the typical design research we conduct, we find that small numbers of the right people are enough to uncover common needs Usabilityproblemsfound Number of users UX AT SCALE
- 5. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 5 UX AT SCALE A key factor driving our work is the fact that we know what people say and what they do are often be different. For this reason, we not only interview people, but we also observe them at work and at play, so that we can design for the natural inconsistencies of everyday life. We Listen and Observe THINK FEEL DO SAY
- 6. TESTING WITH MANY USERS We’re always looking for smart ways to learn more in less time. This mentality has led our researchers to push the boundaries of the data we can record in our research process. Alongside the qualitative data we gather from interviews, we also pull together behavioural data collected over longer time periods. We might record someone’s steps per day, or the route they take to work, in order to find insights into the patterns of everyday. What do people really do? MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 6 UX AT SCALE
- 11. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 11 ABOUT IDEO (viability) (feasibility) (desirability) PEOPLE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY DESIGN THINKING Truly innovative solutions require a balance of desirability, feasibility and viability. Our design process begins with understanding what is desirable from a human point of view, and marries this with what is technologically feasible and economically viable. We Practice Design Thinking Emotional Innovation Experience Innovation Process Innovation Functional Innovation
- 12. The Future of Automobility We’re on the cusp of a revolution in transportation: What will streets teeming with self-driving cars really mean? Once our hands are off the steering wheel and delivery trucks have no driver, what will change in our lives? The Future of Auto- mobility is an online visualization of how life with driverless cars might really look and feel. We considered three scenarios: “slow becomes fast,” which looks at how the experience of commuting will change when we can look away from the road; “21st century mule” where we examine automated package-delivery fleets; and “inverse commute,” where we envision workspaces moving autonomously toward workers — mobile offices parked in underused areas of our cities. Visit automobility.ideo.com MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 12 OUR VISION AUTOMOBILITY
- 19. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 #1 Saving administrative time in the Design Research process. #2 Making it easier for non-technical people to interact with user groups 19 THE CHALLENGE
- 29. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 29 The questions it raises The questions this raises
- 30. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 Amplifying human potential — vs — Designing ourselves out 30
- 31. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 The ethics of deferring to software systems 31
- 32. MATTCOOPER-WRIGHT••UXATSCALE••OCTOBER2017 Disproportionate impact — vs — Not having control 32
- 33. Questions? OCTOBER, 2017 Automating Design Processes: An IDEO Case Study