bjbjq Rikke: re now watching the second interview with Mark Hassenzahl. Mark Hassenzahl is professor
at the Folkwang University in Germany. Mark is doing research in the positive, effective
and motivational aspects of user experience and experience design. Today he ll tell us
about how we can apply these insights when we re designing products. How can we design
products with experience in mind? We re use to thinking about technology and functions
and features when designing products and now we said we should think about experience when
designing products. What does that mean? Mark: What does that mean? Yeah. Okay. I think the
most basic thing is if you talk about experiences it s more you have to think a little bit more
about the why of product use. So normally you have mobile phone, making a telephone
call is its core function and we never question that. We just put it out and leave it to the
people to figure out have they use this telephone call. But then there are many occasions where
a telephone call works just fine and others where we have to use it but it doesn t work.
I think a very good example is this work on technology mediated intimacy where you want
to feel close to somebody, you have to use the mobile phone sometimes but it can be very
awkward because you don t have real stories to tell; telephone is conversation-based technology
so you have to tell stories but I don t have them. The only thing I want is for him to
feel closer to you and this is also communication. There s a certain type of experience and if
we would design with those in mind, you would rather start off why is using this technology,
what is the reason for that. I want to feel close to somebody, what are the requirements
for closeness here? What is it exactly? What are the stories that people make up? What
are the practices they already have to feel close? Then we could take all that stuff and
try to put it into technology, so that if you have it, it tells the story, I m here
for your relating those experiences. For me, that s the difference. It s much more looking
at the actual needs of people and not need in the sense of people don t have a need to
make a telephone call. They have a need to feel close to somebody, they have a need to
be competent, they have a need to be popular, they have a need maybe to help each other,
they have a need to compete with others but they don t have a need to make a telephone
call. Rikke: How do we find out what they need? It must be very individual. Mark: As
a psychologist I would say not. It s something in-between. I think the basic needs the basic
categories of needs we have or the basic motivations are for all people the same. So it s not a
question. In psychology they have this list of three of five or ten or seven needs you
re starting from mass list hierarchy of needs, so we basically know that people have to be
social, they want to improve themselves, they re looking for meaning, I mean that s all
there. So it s not that individual in that sense. The problem is more that people act
out of play out this need in a very different ways, so it s a huge gap between knowing that
somebody cares for relatedness and actually finding the right spot and the right story
to deliver a relatedness experience to somebody and that s a huge gap. Rikke: Yeah. Mark:
So it s highly individual in one sense but I think we can find, based on the general
needs, find archetypal stories we all could relate to and we would all understand. Rikke:
What is the best way to find out about it? Mark: Ask a lot of people. Let them tell their
stories. I just read in a blog I think it has an advertising market research blog, and
the guy - I can t remember the name - made the point that it s futile to ask people about
products and how they relate to it because they don t want to talk about it but they
really like to talk about themselves. I mean we re human; we want to tell stories about
product use and so on. If you ask people who love their iPhone, ask them, Why do you like
it? and they ll come up with a story of a certain, a special story they connect with
that gadget and this actually defines it. If you ask them later, rate it on a scale
from 1 to 10 how good is it, they will, in their mind, try to come up with a story and
then they based their judgment on these kinds of things. So this is very central and we
just have to talk to each other to find that out. Rikke: Okay. The way you define experience
seems to be rather deep because when I just hear experience design it sounds rather shallow
like, Oh, let s design a rollercoaster. s amusement. It s just fun, but, for you, it
s more than that. Mark: Enjoyment is very central to it. So in the field we have this
discussion about positive and negative experience and so on, but I think, for me, from a design
perspective, it s very obvious that we want to design enjoyable or I would say worthwhile
experience at the end of the day. So maybe with a rollercoaster ride is a good example
because it s not always pleasant, it s not pleasant all the time but taken together,
when I m done with it, I can tell a nice story about this rollercoaster and then it becomes
worthwhile, a positive experience. So the amusement is in there but I think by connecting
it to real human needs and connecting it to meaning, it won t be shallow at all. So it
won t be rather going straight to the core of what human ears and how you define yourself,
and so on. So let me give you an example. A variant of the rollercoaster and technology
at the moment is a 3D television. So this is, for me, that s shallow amusement. It s
like, You can have it. It s in 3D. It looks good. You can be stimulated by that, you can
show it around and so on, but the thing itself doesn t really create much more than, for
me, a shallow effect. Rikke: You don t have new stories to tell or feelings Mark: No,
the only short story you have to tell, I just spent four, five thousand Euros on all the
gear. Come visit me at my home to sit around with silly glasses and to have 3D experience,
which is not what I would be after. For example, in technology mediated intimacy, the devices
that connects lovers, it just goes to the core of what we are and it should be enjoyable
but it s still also, there s a lot of reflection about it, there will be problematic situations
and these kinds of products will create all kinds of discussions for couples for example.
What is closeness for you? What is for me? Do you want to have it supported by a device?
All this stuff. For me, this debate is a good indicator of that you re doing something meaningful
that moves people. You won t have this discussion about 3D television. It will be just, Do you
want to spend that money on it? Yes, I want. So okay, but you won t have a deeper...it
won t be getting into your life in a sense. I think with all of this experience designs
I have a mind, you would always create that situation, where you have to take care of
it because you are producing something meaningful which is potentially also damaging in that
sense. So you re asking me about pieces of technology I think which are experiential
in a way and although it hard to come up with some examples, this is one of my favorite
pieces of technology. It basically an mp3 player but what you could do with it, you
can do mixing with it, you can act like a DJ with it and play dance music. The music
is on the hard disk in the machine and you have everything that you to crash a party.
I think it s better than a normal iPod because it tells a clear story of what I can do with
it. It tells a story of me as a hero on the party, it tells a story of popularity and
it also involves a lot of competence because somehow I need to mix the tracks together.
That s why I think it s at least a bit geared towards experience in the world. Here s another
example of an experiential product. It s more about staying connected or close to somebody.
It s a lampshade; if you to switch it on it reads, t forget me, and I gave that to my
wife as a present. Whenever I m not at home and she switches on the light she might think
of me and maybe even give me a call. Rikke: So in the first place, how did you get into
user experience and experience design? How did you start? Mark: I mean I started out
I was trained as a psychologist. I was actually very much interested in [inaudible10:07] psychology
and I had a professor at my university who was in softer agronomics [inaudible 10:14]
and that s where I started out. There s a little anecdote I always like to tell was
we were in the project doing slides for other people, ergonomically optimized slides. So
everything was exactly done so that you can take it up with you memory and perceive everything
correct. The little right forms, the right size is everything. I had this experience
where we did that for somebody and he came back and said it s all well done but people
found the slides very ugly. So that s when I started to that there s maybe a little bit
more to it than just optimizing information processing here and maybe there s a little
bit more to it in a sense of also the values that people have behind that. I mean, optimizing
efficiency and effectiveness is not a goal in itself, I think. It s more sometimes you
need it, sometimes not. I think it s more something that was brought to the table by
the organizations themselves, so they want us to be efficient and effective and they
tend to present less if this would be our actual values. But I think human values are
a little bit different. For example, we care about being competent but that s not captured
by efficiency and effectiveness. Maybe it s an important goal or an important sub-category
of it in that but feeling competent also means challenges, it means you can fail sometimes,
it also means risk and stuff like that. All things that are completely excluded from userability
our point of view. I got aware of that, then I went to Siemens to work there in a Youth
Center First Design Department. Then this all start in the sense of, what could we add
to userability? Userability is important but what could we add to make technology more
humane? Rikke: But how did it all start, the research field? Can you tell us about that?
Mark: Yeah. I mean everybody has its own opinion of Rikke: Your opinion, yes. Mark: For me,
this is the book that started for me. Like Patrick Jordan Designing Pleasurable Products.
I think he was a designer in [inaudible 12:41]. He just called it the new human factors and
he made clear that there is more to it than just plain userability. So that was, for me,
a very important book then. We had this together with Andrew Mong and Mark Blithe; I had a
workshop on - then we called it Funology, the science of enjoyment, that was very important
for me. I think also John McCarthy, Peter Wright s book, Technology as Experience, where
they make the point and all that. They also laid the foundation of taking experience as
a story and how technology can mediate these stories. Personally, it was very important
and this is very highly sited and a lot of people refer to that as [inaudible 13:34]
experience design. I think it happened a bit unfortunate. I wrote a review in 2006 together
with [inaudible 13:43] of the field and we called it the User Experience Research and
tried to summarize all the different things. Today I think it was a bit unfortunate to
call it user experience because this term was already taken up by industry in that sense.
It originated somewhere in the 90s and was credited to Don Norman and it was always very
related to industry work and now we try to come up with a little different perspective
but we still carry the whole weight of that term. That caused us a lot of confusion I
think. Rikke: But in our next interview you get the chance to tell about your way of user
experience and experience design and how we can apply that. Mark: m looking forward to
it. Rikke: You can also have a look at the chapter Mark has written at interactiondesign.org
and you can also find more chapters written by thought-leaders and inventors and you can
find videos as this one as well. Thank you so much for your time and interest. Advice
on Designing with Experience in Mind www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCpp0W-znJ0 (User Experience and Experience Design) h8:+
[Content_Types].xml Iw}, $yi} _rels/.rels theme/theme/themeManager.xml sQ}# theme/theme/theme1.xml
w toc'v )I`n 3Vq%'#q :\TZaG L+M2 e\O* $*c? )6-r IqbJ#x ,AGm T[XF64 E)`# R>QD =(K& =al-
4vfa 0%M0 theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels 6?$Q K(M&$R(.1 [Content_Types].xmlPK _rels/.relsPK
theme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?> <a:clrMap xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main"
bg1="lt1" tx1="dk1" bg2="lt2" tx2="dk2" accent1="accent1" accent2="accent2" accent3="accent3" accent4="accent4"
accent5="accent5" accent6="accent6" hlink="hlink" folHlink="folHlink"/> clinton Normal Jared
Microsoft Office Word Grizli777 Title Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8