Introduction to HumanCentered Design
EPICS High School Workshop
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Carla Zoltowski
A little about me…
B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Purdue
University, 1985
M.S. in Electrical Engineering, Purdue
University, 1987
Triplets born 1992
Ph.D. in Engineering Education, Purdue
University, 2010
Lecturer in Electrical and Computer
Engineering 2001 – 2003
EPICS Education Administrator, 2003 -
Key Topics
Human-Centered Design…
 Human-Centered Design as a Process
 Human-Centered Design as a Mindset
 Connecting Design Practice, Education, and
Research
Continuing with your design
 Specification Development
Stakeholder Analysis
Observation and Interviewing
 Conceptual: Brainstorming and Creativity
EPICS Design Process
Specification Development Phase: Goal is to understand “what” is needed
by understanding the context, stakeholders, requirements of the project, and
why current solutions don’t meet need, and to develop measurable criteria in
which design concepts can be evaluated.
 Understand and describe context (current situation and environment)
 Create stakeholder profiles
 Create mock-ups and simple prototypes: quick, low-cost, multiple
cycles incorporating feedback
 Develop a task analysis and define how users will interact with project
(user scenarios)
 Compare to benchmark products (prior art)
 Develop customer specifications and evaluation criteria; get project
partner approval
Gate 2: Continue if project partner and advisor agree that have identified
the “right” need, and if no existing commercial products meet design
specifications.
Spec or
Requirement
Origin
1. Sound audible Project Partner
in classroom
Requirement
How will you
know if you
achieved it?
Test in
classroom
1.1 Sound range Project Partner
between 15 dB
Requirement of
and 85 dB
audible sound
1.2 Variable
output
2. Project should Project Partner
be educational
Requirement
Pre-, post-test?
Interview
students?
Completed?
EPICS Design Process
Knowing Your Stakeholders
Thinking about the needs of the
project partner.
THEM
(Project Partner,
or user? )
US
Knowing Your Stakeholders
Hearing the needs of the project
partner.
(Users)
(Project Partner)
US
THEM
Knowing Your Stakeholders
Hearing the needs of project
partner and “typical” user(s).
(Project Partner)
THEM
(Typical User)
US
Asking the project
partner and “typical”
users about their needs.
Knowing Your Stakeholders
Hearing the needs of all
stakeholders.
(Project Partner)
(Users)
US
THEM
Knowing Your Stakeholders
Providing all stakeholders
with a role in the design.
US?
THEM?
Cultural Lenses: Janus Face of Culture
Within a culture,
people are similar.
Positives
• Easy to learn and
remember images
• Allows us to use
patterned responses
tuned to images
Negatives
• Oversimplifies
• May blind us to
exceptions
• Sometimes difficult
to detect changing
dominant images
Even within a culture,
people are different.
Positives
• A much more
realistic outlook
• Encourages us to
focus on
individuals
rather than groups
Negatives
• Complexity can
be overwhelming
• Individual actions
difficult to interpret
• Optimal responses
not always clear
Image used with permission from Dr. Brent Jesiek. Taken from Brent Jesiek (2012), "Global Competency: Problem
Solving with People," http://globalhub.org/resources/5173
Stakeholder Analysis
From Dean Nieusma (2012), "Seeing Social Power: Technology Design for User Empowerment,"
http://globalhub.org/resources/5178
1.
For a project you are working on, characterize
the intended beneficiaries and how your
proposed technology is intended to meet their
needs.
Stakeholder Analysis
From Dean Nieusma (2012), "Seeing Social Power: Technology Design for User Empowerment,"
http://globalhub.org/resources/5178
2.
Identify as many distinct social categories within
the targeted beneficiary community as you can.
Consider:
• Age
• Sex/Gender
• Relevant income categories
• Racial/Ethnic/Familial Association
• Geography/physical location
• Level of education
• Ability/Disability
• …
Stakeholder Analysis
From Dean Nieusma (2012), "Seeing Social Power: Technology Design for User Empowerment,"
http://globalhub.org/resources/5178
3.
Identify and characterize the various project
implementers—all groups external to the
beneficiaries that participate in design and
implement the project.
Stakeholder Analysis
From Dean Nieusma (2012), "Seeing Social Power: Technology Design for User Empowerment,"
http://globalhub.org/resources/5178
4.
Identify categories of social power that vary
among implementers and between
implementers and beneficiaries
Consider:
• Financial
• Educational
• Professional
• …
Strategies to Hear Stakeholders
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
1.
Have an open mindset to understanding
the stakeholder needs
•
Observation vs. Interpretation
•
Beginner’s Mind
Strategies to Hear Stakeholders
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
2.
Develop a Research Plan
•
Individual Interview
•
Group Interview
•
In Context Immersion
•
Self-Documentation
•
Community-Driven Discovery
•
Expert Interviews
•
Seeking Inspiration in New Places
Exercise #2: Observation vs. Interpretation
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
1.
Describe what you see happening in the
picture.
Exercise #2: Observation vs. Interpretation
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
2.
Write down two interpretations of this
person’s behavior.
Develop an Interview Plan for Users*
* - that you may not be familiar with.
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
1.
Start with “comfortable” knowledge (e.g.
what do you do for a living? where are
you from?
2.
Ask about bigger (relevant to the project)
questions. What are their dreams for the
future?
3.
Probe deep. Ask the highly relevant
questions related to your project.
Develop an Interview Plan for Project Partners
Used with permission from Prof. Megan Sapp Nelson.
1.
Ask “Who? What? When? Where? And How?”
questions:
https://sharepoint.ecn.purdue.edu/epics/teams/Sha
red%20Documents/Project%20Partner%20meeting
%20planning%20document.pdf
2.
Keep an open attitude throughout the interview.
3.
Show attention by body language.
4.
Focus on content and ideas. Make mental notes of
questions to ask when the speaker is finished.
5.
Ask probing questions that will provide opportunity
for details to emerge.
Exercise #2: Observation vs. Interpretation
Adapted from IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit: http://www.ideo.com/work/humancentered-design-toolkit/
2.
List 3-5 questions to ask her to determine
which (if any) interpretation is correct.
EPICS Design Process
Expanding the Design Space
Brainstorming
Brainstorming can be done individually
or as a team
Team brainstorming = Taking
advantage of the contributions of the
team
Sum is greater than the individuals
Theory is to stimulate our brains to use
our whole brain to expand the options to
include the best solution
Brainstorming rules
 Explain the entire procedure to the team
 Choose one facilitator
Records ideas and participates in the generation
of ideas.
 Record ideas that are easily visible to the whole
team.
 Rotate around the group with each person
getting to add one idea per rotation.
Let members say “pass”
Move quickly.
 NO value judgments. Write ALL ideas down
Facilitator treats ALL ideas the same
 Continue until the entire team is passing
Brainstorming – 6-3-5
Group of 6 people
Each person writes down 3 ideas
Pass to right, next person adds to
paper for 5 minutes..
Ideas can be new, extend, or modify
original ideas
No verbal communication during
activity
Brainstorming – 6-3-5 Practice
Get in groups of 6; select one project
from your group
Each person writes down 3 ideas
Pass to right, next person adds to
paper for 5 minutes..
Ideas can be new, extend, or modify
original ideas
No verbal communication during
activity
Each group
How many different ideas did your
group come up with?
Did you start running out of new
ideas?
Triggers
 Triggers are specific tools to actively bump your brain out of its ruts.
They are designed to get you thinking from a different perspective.
Many triggers are available (crazy, creative people are always
thinking up more), and some are listed below.
 Other’s Shoes – Reconsider the problem from the perspective of a
plumber, civil engineer, physician, child, attorney, basketball player,
etc. You can keep this close to your personal comfort level by
picking roles you know something about, like plumber perhaps, and
then expand to more fanciful ones, like princess.
 Nature – How does nature deal with this issue, or how would you do
it if you were Mother Nature?
 Opposite – How would you solve the opposite problem (from “cut
down a tree” to “grow a tree”)? Or, consider the opposite of some of
your ideas (from “cut with a saw” to join with “hot glue”).
 Random – Use random words, pictures, movie titles, professor
names to generate more ideas.
More Triggers
 Analogy – Consider what has similar function but different
appearance (automatic clothes washer to washboard), what has
similar appearance but different function (washboard to cheese
grater), or what has a similar name and different use (bottle cap to
baseball cap)?
 Craziest Idea – take the craziest idea and try use the kernel to get to
a practical solution (“Cut down a tree with scissors” to “cut with large
hydraulic shears”).
 Boundaries/Constraints – Remove, adjust, or explore the
boundaries of the problem. (If the problem is a better way to wash
clothes, what about recycling the old shirt into a new shirt instead of
washing? Does it have to be “wash” or can it be “clean” or
“deodorize”?)
 Anthropomorphize – Consider yourself to be the piece of equipment
or process. Or consider yourself a molecule flowing through the
system. (For “Why is this part failing?” think- “Am I getting hot
anywhere, where do I feel the stress?”)
 Combine – Take different ideas and see what happens if you add
them together, or combine them in some other way (Problem: “wash
clothes” – combine “spray with a hose” and “pound on a rock” to
“spray with wet rocks”)
 Other – Brainstorm your own trigger or find a trigger in a reference.
Brainstorming - SCAMPER
 Substitute – can you use a different method, device, or
material or changed the environment?
 Combine – can you combine ideas together to produce
a better idea?
 Adapt – what ideas are similar that could be emulated
or adapted to fit the current need?
 Modify, Minify, Magnify – can you change the current
idea, make it smaller or larger in some way?
 Put to other uses – can you use the idea in a new way?
 Eliminate – are there any ideas that have been shown
to not work?
 Reverse, Rearrange – would an opposing idea give you
additional information, or can you interchange the key
elements of the idea to form a new one?
Practice with Triggers
 Other’s Shoes
 Nature
 Opposite
 Random
 Analogy
 Craziest Idea
 Boundaries/
Constraints
 Anthropomorphize
 Combine
Each group
Were using the triggers helpful in
generating more ideas?
Prototypes
Prototyping….rough, quick, very iterative
IDEO working with Gyrus ACMI to design
new apparatus for operating
on delicate nasal tissues
Prototype: whiteboard
marker, 35 mm film
canister and clothespin
Mouse for Apple
Prototype: roller ball from
tube of Ban Roll-on deodorant to the base
of plastic butter dish
From IDEO
HCD
Toolkit
What is
technically and
organizationally
feasible?
What do people
desire?
What can be
financially viable?
D.Mindsets
http://dschool.stanford.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf
D.Mindsets
http://dschool.stanford.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf
D.Mindsets
http://dschool.stanford.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf
Characteristics of “beginning
designers”
 Accept “problem” as given – surface level issues
 Skip research – pose solutions immediately
 Fixate on first ideas – disconnect from “problem”
 Make premature design decisions
 Few or confounded experiments
 Unfocused way of troubleshooting
 Unaware or unable to deal with complexities,
tradeoffs, competing issues
 Design “haphazardly” or in a linear fashion (recipe)
 Tacit designing with little self-reflection
(From Crismond)
Characteristics of “informed designers”
 Recognize ambiguity and complexities – “explored the
challenge”
 Do research on the problem, test assumptions
 Practice idea fluency (problem evolves with design ideas)
 Delay decisions until they explore the challenge
 Use words, sketches, prototypes to explore ideas
 Conduct valid experimental tests
 Focus on key problems when troubleshooting
 Consider benefits and trade-off when making decisions
 Design in a managed way – strategic and iterative
 Practice reflective thinking – learn THROUGH design
From Crismond
Outcome Space of Students’ Experience
of Human-Centered Design
Design Process and Integration
Lacks
Design
Linear
Design
Process
Integrated
and
Iterative
Design
Process
Very
Integrated
Design
Process,
Iterative
Broader
context,
relationship
Empathic
Design
Involves
users
Commitment
Context
Design
in
Context
Needs,
info from
higher level
stakeholders
Keeps
Users’
Needs
in Mind
User is
seen as
information
source
Lacks
appreciation
of
users
Empathic
Design
Service
User info
Input to
Linear
Process
TechnologyCentered
Technology-Centered
Threshold
Experience
Results suggest that critical or immersive
experiences involving real clients and users were
important in allowing the students to experience
human-centered design in more comprehensive
ways.
 All students in “Commitment” had critical
experience.
 Sejal’s wake-up call
 All students in “Empathic Design” had immersive
experiences
Rapid prototyping experience
Assessment trip to developing country
New Way of Thinking
Being introduced to human-centered
design concepts brought a new way of
thinking about design.
Andres: I think it was mostly having more
things to think about or introducing ideas and
ways of thinking about things that you wouldn’t
always think about normally or wouldn’t come
up with on your own.
Gina: I didn’t think in terms of user-centered
design when I came to college. You just think
an engineer designs things.
Context of Experience
 Impact of academic context on experience of
design
Not focus of study, but requires further study
Initially surprised about the degree to which
students discussed aspects of the course.
For most students, design experience was very
much situated in academic context.
 Most students described multiple
experiences from different contexts.
Area to explore is how the student perceived
various experiences and the impact of those
different perceptions on their learning.
 Realness of design
 Approached design differently because of context
Acknowledgements
 James Huff and Monica Cardella contributed to the
creation of these slides
 Resources
Stanford D-School:
 https://dschool.stanford.edu/groups/designres
ources/
 http://dschool.stanford.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/BootcampBootleg20
10v2SLIM.pdf
IDEO Human-Centered Design Toolkit:
 http://www.ideo.com/work/human-centereddesign-toolkit/