{"id":192651,"date":"2023-07-14T21:59:17","date_gmt":"2023-07-14T21:59:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/staging.rm.gfolkdev.net\/?page_id=192651"},"modified":"2023-07-14T22:02:33","modified_gmt":"2023-07-14T22:02:33","slug":"sample-chapter-closing-the-loop","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/rosenfeldmedia.com\/sample-chapter-closing-the-loop\/","title":{"rendered":"Sample Chapter: Closing the Loop"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is a sample chapter from Sheryl Cababa\u2019s<\/a> book Closing the Loop: Systems Thinking for Designers<\/em>. 2023, Rosenfeld Media.<\/p>\n

Chapter 1<\/h2>\n

The Shortcomings of User-Centered Design<\/h3>\n

As a designer working in technology, I never thought I would see Black Mirror<\/em>, the BBC show focused on a future of dystopian technologies, used for product inspiration.<\/p>\n

I was in an ideation workshop with a client team that was working on a design strategy for augmented reality. We were talking about potential features and adding sticky notes with ideas to a whiteboard. During our discussion, we started talking about potential unintended consequences to features and design decisions. One of my colleagues brought up an example from the show Black Mirror<\/em> in which soldiers, implanted with an augmented reality system, saw other humans as monsters that must be killed.<\/p>\n

We discussed it for a bit, and everyone was quiet. Finally, one of our clients spoke up.<\/p>\n

\u201cYeah, that\u2019s a good idea\u2014add it to a note on the whiteboard.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAdd what?\u201d my colleague asked.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou know, the idea that people can use avatars and disguise themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n

It was one of the key moments in which I realized that our methods\u2014our user-centered design methods\u2014were failing us.
\nWe reminded our client that, no, Black Mirror<\/em> wasn\u2019t meant to be a feature inspiration\u2014rather, it\u2019s a cautionary tale. We reminded him that it\u2019s a good example of showing the ramifications of technology\u2014that not all scenarios are good. And that even if he were thinking of it strictly from the technical problem-solving perspective, that the horror of it should give him pause.<\/p>\n

It showed me that the ideation process was too myopic, too idealistic, and way too technology-solution-centered. <\/p>\n

And so is the rest of user-centered design. <\/p>\n

The design practice is experiencing a critical moment in time. Designers design products and services, especially in technology, that often have millions, and even billions, of users, yet they often fail to see design beyond individual users and the immediacy of their interactions with the products and services they work on. They often fail to anticipate and design for the impact on those who are not the direct users of their products, or for long-term effects on those they design for. And before that, they fail to clearly understand the problem space and the context in which their products will live.<\/p>\n

In order to address the problems of user-centered design, you first need to understand what it is, why this is an approach that is widely used, and why it\u2019s so problematic in the first place.<\/p>\n

The Beginnings of User-Centered Design<\/h3>\n

If you\u2019ve ever seen a Dutch bike, known as an omafiets<\/em>, you might notice that it\u2019s got quite a different design than the typical racing bike or modern commuter bike. Its handles are swept back, curved toward the rider in a way that keeps your arms and wrists free of pressure when you are sitting upright on the bike (see Figure 1.1). This type of bike is a good example of user-centered design: it\u2019s meant to make the act of riding the bike more comfortable and enjoyable. It\u2019s designed for the context in which these types of bikes are used, such as getting to work, carrying kids, running errands, all while wearing street clothes, which is quite a different context than, say, a racing bike. It\u2019s a design decision made more than a century ago that prioritizes how the rider experiences the bike. It does not appear to have prioritized a more efficient manufacturing process, or cheaper materials, although perhaps with the popularity of this design over time, these processes may have responded to the demand. Ultimately, it\u2019s a design that puts the user first.<\/p>\n

\"A<\/p>\n

Figure 1.1<\/strong>
\nA woman is riding a Dutch-style omafiets.
\nImage: Todd Fahrner<\/em><\/p>\n

This type of design, which prioritizes the user\u2019s experience, is certainly not new. However, a user-centered approach has not been inherent to, nor codified within, the design process, particularly in digital technology, until fairly recently. Much of the user-centered approach to design in the technology industry was pioneered by designers in the 1980s, and the spread of its ideas can be attributed to the writings of Donald Norman.<\/p>\n

In his 1988 book, The Design of Everyday Things<\/em>, Norman referred to a conceptual model that has three parts: a designer, a user, and a system<\/em>. The interaction between the designer\u2019s decisions and a user\u2019s actions is facilitated through what he called a system, which, in this case, are objects and products. This book popularized the notion of conducting user-centered research and framed \u201cgood design\u201d as that which is intentionally directed toward, and considerate of, a user\u2019s mental models of how things should work.<\/p>\n

These ideas shaped the tenets of the modern user experience design practice. Designers in recent decades have rallied around and emphasized the importance of these ideas: Designers must develop an understanding of end users by engaging with them directly through the course of their design decisions! They should emphasize ease of use and efficiency as it maps to a user\u2019s expectations!<\/em><\/p>\n

These were much needed advancements in the philosophy of product design, particularly as many products entered the digital realm. For example, think about many products\u2014particularly electronics\u2014that existed before the popularization of user-centered design: the first personal computers or VCRs when they initially appeared on the market. They were barely usable, with buttons and interfaces that were impossible to decipher. The approach that has brought us the iPhone, and the obsession with user-friendliness, was a much needed shift that users of digital products have all benefited from.<\/p>\n

This approach has been built upon and articulated in a process known as design thinking<\/em>, popularized by the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (also known as the d.school<\/em>). The process was borrowed from a method called challenge mapping<\/em> developed by Min Basadur, which sought to emphasize problem generation and conceptualization prior to solution development.<\/p>\n

The five parts of the design-thinking process are typically articulated in the following way:<\/p>\n