Fred's Blog

Logo I did for @TechWraith's node.js blogging framework, Scotch.

Well, my unemployment officially ends this week, and I'm moving onto the next chapter of my life. I'll be joining Getable as product designer and I couldn't be any more super, ridiculously stoked.

A little over a year ago, I started my journey designing digital products when I left school and began working on my own startups. Since then, there have been a lot of ups and downs. But despite all of that, those experiences were extremely valuable and I wouldn't trade them for the world.

When our startup didn't work out, my partner and I decided to spend a few months in Asia. And what do you do when you're on a long vacation in an exotic location? Soul-search, of course. I knew that whatever I did next, I wanted to have a big impact and help people.

At Getable, we have been given the opportunity to do that. We are taking strides to greatly improve the experiences and workflows of the construction industry. I truly believe that as creators of software, we have a responsibility to improve these industries that have long been neglected and underserved. In other words: industries like construction, health, education, agriculture, etc. have been stuck with shitty software for a long time, and it's because all the people with the skill and ability are stuck solving shitty problems or problems that don't exist.

I feel extremely lucky to be joining a team that is so passionate about solving a problem worth solving. After spending some time with the team, I know that we are all committed to empowering people and making their lives easier.

I wanted to play around with redesigning Quora, because I spend unholy amounts of time on Quora and I've gotten to know the interface pretty well. I've always admired how legible the entire site is, and how many actions are on each page without seeming too cluttered.

However, I've always had a bit of a problem with the UX of the menus and sidebar. Menu items are organized strangely, and there are a lot of redundant actions as well as inconsistent ones. I also think that the actionable items and typography could be improved in the feed. 

Goals:

Preserve the Quora brand identity

Tablet/touch optimization

Logical organization of menu and sidebar items

Remove unnecessary redundant actions

Give more prominence to the engagement-driving actions (e.g. following, voting, discovery)

Improve legibility and organization of content and actions in activity feed

Present Quora:

Top Navigation

There are three navigation items on the right side of the navigation bar: write, home, and current user. Each one of these items has a dropdown menu, and two of them are buttons themselves. 

Write - This button is incosistent with the other two, because it's the only one that doesn't perform an action when clicked.

Home - Used as an indicator for notifications, but the button takes you to the homepage. Notifications are on a separate page, but to get to them, the action is buried in the 'Home' dropdown menu.

Sidebar

There is a lack of hierarchy here. Main actions are located at the top, but given the same prominence as trending topics and follow/friend suggestions. Everything meshes together, and the items are not organized consistently.

Feed

I've always liked the design of the Quora feed. It has good hierarchy and legibility. There are a lot of actions hidden within each feed item that are easily seen and found when you need them, but fade away into the background when you don't.

Although the feed isn't too visually cluttered, and it takes a simple approach, the actions are a little cramped and could do with some breathing room. More space is also an absolute necessity when it comes to usability on a tablet.

I also think that the important engagement-driving actions such as voting and following are not as prominent as they should be. The content of each post should still be the most visible thing within each item, but I believe Quora could benefit from giving certain actions more permanence and visibility.

Redesigned Quora:

Sketches:

I went really low-fidelity on the wireframing of this project. I wasn't redesigning any complex flows, so I ended up doing most of my wireframes on paper.

Home screen:

Notifications Drop-down:

Portrait Orientation:

This week, Kickstarter released a statement about some changes they are making and new regulations for project creators. Although this is a good first step, more changes are needed to reduce the number of failed projects. The official statement can be found here, but here are the main points:

Project creators will have to complete a new section to inform contributors of "risks and challenges".

Product simulations are prohibited - creators can only show what the product does in its current stage of development

No more photorealistic renderings that could be confused for actual product. However, CAD renderings, technical drawings, etc. are not prohibited.

New guidelines only apply to new consumer hardware and product design projects. 

The reasons for these changes are pretty obvious. There have just been too many projects that have failed, haven't shipped, and creators that couldn't execute. This has occurred even with huge amounts of contributors and funding for a project.

These problems lie in the fact that Kickstarter is simply a funding platform which gives money to the creators, and sends them off to execute on their own. The decision of whether or not the creators can actually ship is left up to the contributors. However, contributors on Kickstarter act as consumers. Kickstarter wants to say with their post and these changes that "Kickstarter is not a store". But that's not enough.

The real problem is educating users that they are not just consumers, but investors as well. To a certain degree, contributors should think like investors and judge whether or not the creators can actually execute. 

I've had people ask me why we don't try to fund our startup through Kickstarter. The reasons we have decided not to go that route are the same reasons that have plagued failed Kickstarter projects. Traditional venture capital and funding is not only about money - it's also about mentorship and networks. Your investors that have a stake in you, will do what is in their power to help you get shit done.

Because Kickstarter doesn't have that, the project creators should be particularly experienced or absolutely display that they have the ability to learn how to source, manufacture, ship, and everything in between.

Gamification isn't a bad word. The word "gamification" tends to stir up images of progress bars, leaderboards, badges, and other crap, but it's much more than that. I was lucky enough to attend a VLAB panel the other night that made me think pretty hard about gamification now and where it's headed. This is what we know now:

When done right, gamification can increase productivity, output, engagement. 

However, gamification can never be the core of a product. A product does not have value because it simply has been gamified. The product itself must first present some kind of core value to the user, and then the game mechanics can facilitate further engagement and user retention.

Users are becoming smarter. They are becoming more and more aware that just badges, points, and leaderboards are arbitrary. These things cannot be the only perceived value of gamification to a user.

Gamification does not lead to fun. It can be applied to work, productivity, and filing taxes, as much as it can to food and recreation.

So now that we know this much about gamification, we can make some assumptions about where it's going. We all know that Foursquare and Zynga games are continuing to have a large falling off of engagement. We know that one reason for this is because users are getting smarter, and once they become privy to the fact that their actions are arbitrary, they stop "playing".

To figure out how this will all evolve, we should consider the gaming mechanics that make apps work or not work. Game mechanics can either help onboard users or facilitate engagement and retention. For example, there is what I'll call the Tamagotchi mechanic. People picked up and played Tamagotchi because they liked the premise. They kept playing to keep their Tamagotchi alive. The same mechanic is used in Farmville: the user doesn't continue to play to simulate the life of a farmer, they continue to play because if they don't, their strawberries will whither and die.

Another example is a successful mechanic that was used for Microsoft employees. They found that a leaderboard may work for competitive people, but for those that are not so competitive, they will be less engaged if they are a lower rank. In addition to this, someone that is already good, can continue without improving performance, and may remain at the top. By ranking people by their own improved performance, they found that they kept all employees engaged for a longer amount of time. 

So, here are some of my thoughts about the future of gamification:

We know that the mechanics explained above actually work. However, "social games" continue to lose engagement. This may be because they do not present any intrinsic value to an evolved and smarter user. So, it's the core of the product that doesn't provide value - not the game mechanics.

The future success of gamified apps depends on evolving core products and how they work with game mechanics so they continue to provide ACTUAL value to users.

There are still a limited number of mechanics being utilized. Newly leveraged mechanics could be a number of things including end-games (boss battles), social co-op mechanics, altruism, etc.

Gamified products need a tighter feedback loop. In an actual game, you die or you get hurt, and you know not to do that again. In health and fitness apps for example, a user doesn't get that kind of immediate feedback loop when they don't run or don't go to the gym.

Gamification will move beyond zero-sum gaming. Different verticals will emphasize more altruistic gaming and rewards. This can provide more actual value to users, more social experiences, and that tighter feedback loop.

There will be more clearly defined best practices and mechanics for different verticals: fitness, healthcare, education, etc.

College just wasn't for me anymore. I won't necessarily say that college is a waste of time for aspiring UX designers and product designers, that I didn't learn anything, or that my path is necessarily the right one. As a matter of fact, I'm super grateful for my first few years of college and my time in the industrial design program.

Before I got into that program, I couldn't sketch, I didn't know what design-thinking was, I knew jack-shit about user-centered design, and I sure as hell didn't understand that design was something beyond aesthetics. I definitely wouldn't be where I am without my professors, mentors, and fellow students.

It was in school that I learned design process, teamwork, brainstorming, iteration, testing, and many other skills. However, after a couple years, my time in formal education had run it's course. I had gone out and gotten a taste of working in the real world. Actually experiencing the reality of design processes, working with real constraints, and real bosses and coworkers.

At the end of the day, the projects and constraints in school are entirely manufactured. You don't get the constraints of real users, real cost of implementation, or real dynamics of a team. You must adhere to deadlines and deliverables that are arbitrary.

I couldn't go back to school because I learned that products are living and breathing things. They change, they break, they're dynamic, and as a designer, you have to consider all the moving parts. I wasn't going to learn any more about product in school. They would have just been exercises - not field duty.

In the year and a half I could spend finishing school, I have the opportunity to learn so much more from working on my own in the field, as well as learning from other practicing professionals. The idea that I need to get the piece of paper as insurance just wasn't a good enough reason for me to stay.

So what can students do to be prepared for the real world, if school isn't going to do it? And how can schools do a better job of preparing their students?

Real-world experience: internships, mentorships, apprenticeships, entrepreneurship. Design is a trade, as much as it is an artform. There is a great deal to learn from teachers, but many of them are not serious, practicing professionals. Many don't do the extra work to understand and keep up with current tools, industry awareness, and modern practices (go ahead and ask them about Agile and Lean UX).

In addition to learning from practicing professionals, students need to put themselves into positions where they can learn the ins-and-outs of product. If you don't put yourself through the rigors of reality, nor do you put your products through implementation and usage - then you can't begin honing your skills in building real products and experiences.

A complete stranger sent me an email last week and totally surprised me. To be honest, I've never thought too much about making something that actually MEANT something to someone personally. It's pretty unreal.

Edit [8/23/12] - It's so interesting to go back and read this. 8 months ago, I was struggling to understand what a UX designer was exactly. Since then, I've grown and learned enough to feel comfortable calling myself a UX/UI designer. #fakeittilyoumakeit

/edit

I've been getting into some iOS app design for a new venture, and as an industrial designer it's been pretty interesting so far. In trying to get down the basics, I've had to do a lot of searching and sifting. Most resources I've come across have been geared towards developers or web designers, and nothing in between. This is an interesting dilemma because being educated in industrial design means being educated in user experience, and to a certain degree Illustrator and Photoshop. However, I lack skills and technical knowledge regarding coding, exporting assets, specific tools and tricks in Photoshop, etc. So to help myself and others that might be in a similar position, I am compiling a list of resources here that I've found to be useful.

Note: I am also including some articles and resources on the specifics and clarification on what it means to be a UX designer.

1. The HIG

This is Apple's human interface guidelines. It includes best practices, basic knowledge and an essential starting point for any aspiring iOS designers.

2. Start Here (after reading the HIG)

http://mobile.tutsplus.com is a great resource for tutorials and basic skills. The link above includes information on retina and non-retina resolutions, how to set up a canvas, and most importantly - links to some templates.

3. Downloads from Teehan+Lax

All the templates and elements you will need to get started

4. Tapworthy by Josh Clark

If you aren't familiar with too many iPhone apps or mobile interfaces then this is a good book to look into. It contains a lot of information concerning UX, IxD, and marketing. The book also includes many case studies of successful apps.

5. Iterate Podcast

I came across this podcast when I was looking for something I could just listen to and absorb information while I was doing other things. The first half of every episode is a discussion of mobile design news and the second half is an interview with a successful consultant or firm. At first the jargon is a little hard to follow, but you'll catch on as you do more research.

6. Bjango Articles

These are technical and deep articles about best practices and tips for app design. They were a little hard to follow for me at first, but they are essential. There are elso some downloadable actions that will make your life a whole lot easier.

7. UX Resources

Article - From Industrial Design to User Experience : The heritage and evolving role of experience-driven design

Quora - What specific skills does a UX designer need to have?

8. Inspiration

http://dribbble.com/

http://pttrns.com/

http://wellplacedpixels.com/

http://littlebigdetails.com/