Hello. In the previous lecture we've focused on
the one component of the process of design creation,
writing design questions, which allows you to analyze
the design space and figure out which variations are possible.
In this lecture we'll focus on how to answer design questions.
But first, let's look at preconditions that
should be met to effectively generate design solutions.
The first thing that influences the divergent thinking that
employed to explore design alternatives is the amount of sleep.
The study of J. Horne showed that performance of
divergent thinking tasks is significantly impaired by sleep loss,
opposite to convergent thinking tasks which are more resilient to short-term sleep loss.
So it's crucial to have enough sleep.
Another precondition is positive mood.
The results of the study conducted by
Susan Vosburg showed that people in elevated moods may
prefer what she called status business
strategies which leads to a high number of proposed solutions.
This is one of the reasons why a good atmosphere at work is necessary.
By the use of external memory I mean a presentation of your ideas, for instance,
on paper while bored or using some prototype app in the process of generation.
I believe we all experience that feeling when your ideas start
coming up because you are trying too hard to keep in mind exisiting ideas.
Your brain just can't do both things.
I highly recommend that you write down any ideas right away
using an appropriate form of the presentation because according to
the results of this study of one called Van der Lugt it simplifies access to
all idea in supporting a reinterpretative cycle in the individual's thinking process.
Represented solutions on external media such as [inaudible]
is no less important than external presentation of design questions.
Suggesting alternatives to each design question on
the basis of your own knowledge is your basic tool.
All about interfaces we've seen,
all design tasks you've completed contribute to your knowledge.
There are external forms of
design knowledge that you definitely should take advantage of.
For instance, there are some guidelines
cover the most common design questions you'll face.
Employing this basic tool you'll be able to
suggest several answers to each design question right away.
The question is, when do we need more design alternatives?
Are these answers not enough?
The obvious answer is that your solutions should
prove themselves usable for empirical evaluation.
If there is no interaction problems then you don't need
more alternatives but you should always suppose that what you did can be done better.
You may find a more usable answer to the design question
that seems to be studied lengthwise than crosswise.
Here is an example.
A picker was used to set time in standard iOS alarm clock app from ancient times.
This is a common solution for such kind of user tasks that proved itself quite usable.
However, those who have been using it for a while
know that it requires some effort to change time
if an alarm clock was set to say 7:15 and you want to set it to 1745.
An old Google solution for the same user task is shown on the right.
Users can have multiple tabs on buttons with plus and minus signs to change
time or they can use a virtual keyboard by typing directly to each field.
As you might guess both ways aren't so fast either.
How can you make it better?
It seemed impossible for its time and then a new Google solution appeared.
It takes from two to three taps to set any time.
This solution is also pretty clear from iOS Android users.
Returning to my question,
when do we need more design alternatives?
Ultimately, the answer comes down to availability of time.
You may spend all the time working on
a single design question or spend some time on each question.
Every design task is unique.
It's your call where to focus your effort.
The right techniques they can help you to explore alternatives.
Not all of them are applicable for interaction design tasks.
That is why I narrowed down the list to four of such tools.
These techniques are suitable for individual and group generation.
The last one exploits the power of the crowd to generate alternative designs.
The technique that I call steal like an artist is quite
simple and employs extensive review of state of all design solutions.
You just go for resources like those presented on
this slide and correct solutions proper to the design questions you are faced with.
Even if some solutions do not fit the constraints of your design task,
we may give you an idea of an appropriate solution.
Of course, copying is concerned with law issues.
Direct copying can cause problems but design solutions found through the use of
this technique usually require some tuning to make them
work within an instant interaction and visual design frameworks.
Thus, it's not direct copy.
Despite its simplicity, this is one of the most,
if not the most powerful creativity tool from your tool box.
I recommend that you use it in addition to
aforementioned basic tool and strictly
before proceeding to the next creativity tools from the list.
Despite the fact that during generation of
solutions it is recommended not to stop yourself
any harm that is considered solutions that do not feed constraints of your design task.
The constraints affect the creative process.
For example, in group design idea generation sessions
people are usually afraid to suggest non-realistic solutions,
solutions that go beyond
existent technological or financial capabilities of the company they work at.
Reframing implies exactly that,
to go beyond constraints of the designed task you work on.
It works as follows.
Let's assume that intended usage context of the app implies its use on smartphones only.
You change one constraint, for instance,
imagine how the design of the app would look like on tablets.
That gives you new design alternatives.
Or let's say that you work on the user scenario that include shows of a city tour.
You may imagine how the user interface would look
like if users had only five seconds to choose at all.
I think you get the idea.
The framework can be used with an individual and group generations.
The next very famous creativity technique is brainstorming.
It is a structured group discussion which allows to
connect with a number of ideas to a single problem,
in our case, to a design question.
The classical technique proposed by Alex Osborn
implies that participants should follow four rules.
The first one implies quantity of ideas over the quality.
The second rule implies separation of generation and selection of solutions through time.
As I said earlier criticism interferes with
the divergent thinking so it should be withheld while generating design alternatives.
The third rule states that as I said in
the previous slide ideas beyond existing constraints are welcome.
The thoughtful implies extensive combination and building on top of other ideas.
A brainstorming session requires proper moderation
that is extremely important for the success of the session.
The job of the moderator is to provide
participants who is creating exercises for instance six, three,
five brand writing before the session to
describe a design question and all other constraints to
present rules what we've discussed earlier to
determine the sequence in which participants will be present in their ideas, etc.
Brainstorming is a labor-intensive technique.
For a better effort the group should consist of people with diverse backgrounds.
You may invite users to participate in brainstorming.
The group should be relatively large.
The optimal number suggested by Alex Osborn is 12.
I want your comment to conduct brainstorming with
less than six participants excluding the moderator.
Despite the fact that it's a labor-intensive technique,
with proper facilitation brainstorming gives stunning results.
The last creativity tool from the list involves the use of services like microworkers [inaudible]
where you can post the design task
which people with appropriate skills will perform for a small work.
The key here is the number of people participating in your campaign.
Thus, your task shouldn't be too large and that's all the example of
appropriate task is the design question that we discussed earlier in this lecture.
How does a user sets time?
It's small and interesting.
Crowdsourcing requires time and a small financial investment but it
requires a little effort from you that may be very useful in some situations.
The last thing I'd like to remind you is that you should strive not
only to the overall number of design alternatives but also to the diversity.
It's worth nothing if you generated 10 alternatives that look alike.
Here is an example of five designs of
a simple calculator which is significantly different from each other.
The last one is the typical calculator.
The next implies the writing of equations.
The third construction of equations using a predefined alphabet.
The fourth taking a photo of equations and the last
the use of an equation constructor similar to one from Microsoft Office.
This is an example of a new exploration of design alternatives.
Thank you for watching.
I look forward to seeing you in the next lecture.
Pavel ManakhovAssociate Professor
