Blog

  • Design for Safety, An Excerpt

    Design for Safety, An Excerpt

    According to anti-racist scholar Kim Crayton, “intention without plan is chaos.” We’ve discussed how our prejudices, beliefs, and carelessness toward marginalized and resilient parties lead to dangerous and irresponsible tech—but what, precisely, do we need to do to fix it? We need a strategy, not just the desire to make our software safer.

    This section will provide you with that plan of action. It covers how to incorporate safety principles into your design work in order to make tech that’s secure, how to persuade your stakeholders that this work is important, and how to respond to the critique that what we really need is more diversity. ( Spoiler: We do, but diversity alone cannot solve unethical, unsafe technology. )

    The method for equitable safety

    Your objectives when designing for protection are as follows:

    • determine way your product can be used for misuse,
    • style ways to prevent the maltreatment, and
    • offer assistance for users who are prone to regain control and power.

    The Process for Inclusive Safety is a tool to help you reach those goals ( Fig 5.1 ). I developed this strategy in 2018 to better understand the different methods I used to create products that were designed with safety in mind. Whether you are creating an entirely new product or adding to an existing element, the Process can help you produce your product secure and diverse. The Process includes five basic areas of action:

    • conducting studies
    • Creating themes
    • Pondering issues
    • Designing options
    • Testing for security

    The Process is meant to be flexible; in some situations, it didn’t make sense for groups to employ every step. Use the parts that are related to your special function and environment, this is meant to be something you can put into your existing style process.

    And once you use it, if you have an idea for making it better or simply want to give perspective of how it helped your group, please get in touch with me. It’s a life report that I hope technicians can use as a practical and useful resource in their day-to-day work.

    If you’re working on a product especially for a resilient team or survivors of some form of injury, such as an application for survivors of domestic violence, sexual abuse, or drug addiction, be sure to read Section 7, which covers that position directly and should be handled a bit different. The principles set forth here are for putting safety first when creating a more general product with a broad user base ( which, as we already know from statistics, will include some groups that should be protected from harm ). Chapter 7 is focused on products that are specifically for vulnerable groups and people who have experienced trauma.

    Step 1: Conduct research

    Design research should include a thorough analysis of how your technology might be used for abuse as well as specific insights into the experiences of those who have witnessed and perpetrated that kind of abuse. At this stage, you and your team will investigate issues of interpersonal harm and abuse, and explore any other safety, security, or inclusivity issues that might be a concern for your product or service, like data security, racist algorithms, and harassment.

    broad-based research

    Your project should begin with broad, general research into similar products and issues around safety and ethical concerns that have already been reported. For example, a team building a smart home device would do well to understand the multitude of ways that existing smart home devices have been used as tools of abuse. If your product involves artificial intelligence, make sure to learn about the potential for racism and other issues that have been reported in other AI products. Nearly all types of technology have some kind of potential or actual harm that’s been reported on in the news or written about by academics. Google Scholar is a useful resource for locating these studies.

    Specific research: Survivors

    When possible and appropriate, include direct research ( surveys and interviews ) with people who are experts in the forms of harm you have uncovered. In order to have a better understanding of the subject and be better positioned to prevent retraumatize survivors, you should interview advocates working in the area of your research first. If you’ve uncovered possible domestic violence issues, for example, the experts you’ll want to speak with are survivors themselves, as well as workers at domestic violence hotlines, shelters, other related nonprofits, and lawyers.

    It is crucial to pay people for their knowledge and lived experiences, especially when interviewing survivors of any kind of trauma. Don’t ask survivors to share their trauma for free, as this is exploitative. While some survivors may not want to be paid, you should always make the offer in the initial ask. Alternative to paying is to donate to a cause fighting the kind of violence the interviewee experienced. We’ll talk more about how to appropriately interview survivors in Chapter 6.

    Abusers specifically: research

    It’s unlikely that teams aiming to design for safety will be able to interview self-proclaimed abusers or people who have broken laws around things like hacking. Don’t make this a goal, rather, try to get at this angle in your general research. Attempt to understand how abusers or bad actors use technology to harm others, how they use it against others, and how they justify or explain the abuse.

    Step 2: Create archetypes

    Use your research’s findings to create the archetypes of abuser and survivor once you’ve finished your research. Archetypes are not personas, as they’re not based on real people that you interviewed and surveyed. Instead, they’re based on your research into likely safety issues, much like when we design for accessibility: we don’t need to have found a group of blind or low-vision users in our interview pool to create a design that’s inclusive of them. Instead, we base those designs on existing research and the requirements of this group. Personas typically represent real users and include many details, while archetypes are broader and can be more generalized.

    The abuser archetype is defined as someone who views a product as a means of harm ( Fig. 5.2 ). They may be trying to harm someone they don’t know through surveillance or anonymous harassment, or they may be trying to control, monitor, abuse, or torment someone they know personally.

    The survivor archetype describes a person who is being abused with the product. There are various situations to consider in terms of the archetype’s understanding of the abuse and how to put an end to it: Do they need proof of abuse they already suspect is happening, or are they unaware they’ve been targeted in the first place and need to be alerted ( Fig 5.3 )?

    You may want to make multiple survivor archetypes to capture a range of different experiences. They may be aware of the abuse being occurring but not be able to stop it, such as when a stalker keeps tracing their whereabouts or when an abuser locks them out of IoT devices ( Fig. 5.4). Include as many of these scenarios as you need to in your survivor archetype. You’ll use these later when you create solutions to help your survivor archetypes achieve their objectives of preventing and ending abuse.

    It may be useful for you to create persona-like artifacts for your archetypes, such as the three examples shown. Focus on their objectives rather than the demographic details we frequently see in personas. The goals of the abuser will be to carry out the specific abuse you’ve identified, while the goals of the survivor will be to prevent abuse, understand that abuse is happening, make ongoing abuse stop, or regain control over the technology that’s being used for abuse. Later, you’ll think about how to help the survivor’s goals and the abuser’s goals.

    And while the “abuser/survivor” model fits most cases, it doesn’t fit all, so modify it as you need to. For example, if you uncovered an issue with security, such as the ability for someone to hack into a home camera system and talk to children, the malicious hacker would get the abuser archetype and the child’s parents would get survivor archetype.

    Step 3: Remind yourself of your issues

    After creating archetypes, brainstorm novel abuse cases and safety issues. You’re trying to identify entirely new safety issues that are unique to your product or service by using the term” Novel” in terms of things you’ve not found in your research. The goal with this step is to exhaust every effort of identifying harms your product could cause. You aren’t worrying about how to prevent the harm yet—that comes in the next step.

    What other uses could your product be used for besides what you’ve already identified in your research? I recommend setting aside at least a few hours with your team for this process.

    Try conducting a Black Mirror brainstorming if you’re looking for a place to start. This exercise is based on the show Black Mirror, which features stories about the dark possibilities of technology. Try to figure out how your product would be used in an episode of the show—the most wild, awful, out-of-control ways it could be used for harm. Participants in Black Mirror brainstorming typically end up having a lot of fun ( which I believe is great because having fun when designing for safety! ). I recommend time-boxing a Black Mirror brainstorm to half an hour, and then dialing it back and using the rest of the time thinking of more realistic forms of harm.

    You may still not feel confident that you have found every possible source of harm after identifying as many opportunities for abuse as possible. A healthy amount of anxiety is normal when you’re doing this kind of work. It’s common for teams designing for safety to worry,” Have we really identified every possible harm? What if something is missing, then? If you’ve spent at least four hours coming up with ways your product could be used for harm and have run out of ideas, go to the next step.

    It’s impossible to say 100 % assurance that you’ve done everything, but instead of aiming for 100 %, acknowledge that you’ve done it and will continue to prioritize safety in the future. Once your product is released, your users may identify new issues that you missed, aim to receive that feedback graciously and course-correct quickly.

    Step 4: Design solutions

    You should now be aware of the ways your product can be used for harm as well as survivor and abuser archetypes describing opposing user objectives. The next step is to identify ways to design against the identified abuser’s goals and to support the survivor’s goals. This is a good addition to existing design processes where you’re making recommendations for solutions to the various issues your research has identified.

    Some questions to ask yourself to help prevent harm and support your archetypes include:

    • Can you design your product in such a way that the identified harm cannot happen in the first place? If not, what barriers can you place to stop the harm from occurring?
    • How can you make the victim aware that abuse is happening through your product?
    • How can you assist the victim in understanding what they need to do to stop the problem?
    • Can you identify any types of user activity that would indicate some form of harm or abuse? Could your product help the user access support?

    In some products, it’s possible to proactively detect harm is occurring. For example, a pregnancy app might be modified to allow the user to report that they were the victim of an assault, which could trigger an offer to receive resources for local and national organizations. Although this kind of proactiveness is not always possible, it’s worthwhile to spend a half hour talking about how your product could help the user receive help in a safe manner if any kind of user activity would indicate some form of harm or abuse.

    That said, use caution: you don’t want to do anything that could put a user in harm’s way if their devices are being monitored. If you do offer some kind of proactive help, always make it voluntary, and think through other safety issues, such as the need to keep the user in-app in case an abuser is checking their search history. In the next chapter, we’ll examine a good illustration of this.

    Step 5: Test for safety

    The final step is to evaluate your prototypes from the perspective of your archetypes, who wants to harm the product and the victim of the harm who needs to regain control over the technology. Just like any other kind of product testing, at this point you’ll aim to rigorously test out your safety solutions so that you can identify gaps and correct them, validate that your designs will help keep your users safe, and feel more confident releasing your product into the world.

    Ideally, safety testing happens along with usability testing. If you work for a company that doesn’t conduct usability testing, you might be able to use safety testing to deftly perform both. A user who uses your design while trying to use it against someone else can also be encouraged to point out interactions or other design details that don’t make sense to them.

    You’ll want to conduct safety testing on either your final prototype or the actual product if it’s already been released. There is no harm in testing an existing product that wasn’t created with safety goals in mind right away; “etrofitting” it for safety is a wise thing to do.

    Remember that testing for safety involves testing from the perspective of both an abuser and a survivor, though it may not make sense for you to do both. Alternatively, if you made multiple survivor archetypes to capture multiple scenarios, you’ll want to test from the perspective of each one.

    You as the designer are most likely too closely connected to the product and its design by this point to be a valuable tester, you know the product too well, as with other forms of usability testing. Instead of doing it yourself, set up testing as you would with other usability testing: find someone who is not familiar with the product and its design, set the scene, give them a task, encourage them to think out loud, and observe how they attempt to complete it.

    Abuse testing

    The goal of this testing is to understand how easy it is for someone to weaponize your product for harm. Unlike with usability testing, you want to make it impossible, or at least difficult, for them to achieve their goal. Use your product in an effort to accomplish the objectives in the abuser archetype you created earlier.

    For example, for a fitness app with GPS-enabled location features, we can imagine that the abuser archetype would have the goal of figuring out where his ex-girlfriend now lives. With this in mind, you’d make every effort to discover the location of a different user who has their privacy settings in place. You might try to see her running routes, view any available information on her profile, view anything available about her location ( which she has set to private ), and investigate the profiles of any other users somehow connected with her account, such as her followers.

    If by the end of this you’ve managed to uncover some of her location data, despite her having set her profile to private, you know now that your product enables stalking. Reverting to step 4 and figuring out how to stop this from occurring is your next step. You may need to repeat the process of designing solutions and testing them more than once.

    Survivor testing

    Survivor testing involves identifying how to give information and power to the survivor. It might not always make sense based on the product or context. The survivor archetype’s goal of not being stalked is satisfied by preventing an attempt by an abuser archetype to stalk someone, so separate testing from the survivor’s perspective wouldn’t be required.

    However, there are cases where it makes sense. For instance, a survivor archetype’s goal would be to discover who or what causes the temperature to change when they aren’t altering it themselves. You could test this by looking for the thermostat’s history log and checking for usernames, actions, and times, if you couldn’t find that information, you would have more work to do in step 4.

    Another goal might be regaining control of the thermostat once the survivor realizes the abuser is remotely changing its settings. Are there any instructions that explain how to remove a user and change the password, and are they simple to find? For your test, you would need to try to figure out how to do this. This might again reveal that more work is needed to make it clear to the user how they can regain control of the device or account.

    stress testing

    To make your product more inclusive and compassionate, consider adding stress testing. This concept comes from Design for Real Life by Eric Meyer and Sara Wachter-Boettcher. The authors noted that personas typically focus on those who are having a good day, but that real users are frequently anxious, stressed out, having a bad day, or even going through tragedy. These are called” stress cases”, and testing your products for users in stress-case situations can help you identify places where your design lacks compassion. More information about how to incorporate stress cases into your design can be found in Design for Real Life, as well as in many other effective methods for designing with compassion.

  • A Content Model Is Not a Design System

    A Content Model Is Not a Design System

    Do you recall the days when having a fantastic site was sufficient? Today, people are getting answers from Siri, Google search fragments, and mobile applications, not only our websites. Organizations with forward-thinking goals have adopted an holistic content strategy that aims to reach people across a range of digital programs and platforms.

    However, how can a content management system ( CMS ) be set up to reach your audience both now and in the future? I learned the hard way that creating a content model—a concept of information types, attributes, and relationships that let people and systems understand content—with my more comfortable design-system wondering would collapse my patient’s holistic information strategy. By developing willing versions that are conceptual and that also connect related information, you can avoid that result.

    I just had the opportunity to direct the CMS application for a Fortune 500 company. The customer was excited by the benefits of an holistic information plan, including material modify, multichannel marketing, and robot delivery—designing content to be comprehensible to bots, Google knowledge panels, snippets, and voice user interfaces.

    For our information to be understood by many systems, the unit needed conceptual types, which are names given based on their meaning rather than their presentation. This is crucial for an multichannel content strategy. Our goal was to allow writers to produce original content that could be used wherever they felt was most useful. But as the job proceeded, I realized that supporting material utilize at the range that my client needed required the whole group to identify a new pattern.

    Despite our best efforts, we remained influenced by pattern systems, which we were more comfortable with. An holistic content strategy doesn’t rely on WYSIWYG equipment for design and layout, unlike web-focused material strategies. Our tendency to approach the material model with our common design-system thinking frequently led us to veer away from one of the main purposes of a material model: delivering content to audiences on various marketing channels.

    Two fundamental tenets must be followed in order to create a successful content model

    We had to explain to our designers, developers, and stakeholders that their previous web projects had taught them that content should be treated as visual building blocks that fit into layouts. The previous approach was not only more familiar but also more intuitive—at least at first—because it made the designs feel more tangible. We learned two guiding principles that helped the team understand how a content model and the design processes we were familiar with were:

    1. Instead of layout, semantics must be used by content models.
    2. And content models should connect content that belongs together.

    Semantic content models

    A semantic content model uses type and attribute names that reflect the content’s intended purpose and not how it will be displayed. For example, in a nonsemantic model, teams might create types like teasers, media blocks, and cards. These types may make it simple to present content, but they do not aid in understanding the meaning of the content, which would have opened the door to the content presented in each marketing channel. In contrast, a semantic content model uses type names like “product,”” service,” and “testimonial” to allow for each delivery channel to interpret and use the content as it sees fit.

    When you’re creating a semantic content model, a great place to start is to look over the types and properties defined by Schema. a curated resource for type definitions that are understandable on platforms like Google search, type definitions .org

    Benefits of a semantic content model include:

      Even if your team doesn’t care about omnichannel content, a semantic content model decouples content from its presentation so that teams can evolve the website’s design without needing to refactor its content. Content can withstand obtrusive website redesigns in this way.
    • A semantic content model also gives you a competitive advantage. By adding structured data based on Schema. Using its types and properties, a website can provide hints to help Google understand the content, display it in search snippets or knowledge panels, and use it to respond to voice-interface user questions. Without ever visiting your website, potential visitors could easily find your content.
    • Beyond those practical benefits, you’ll also need a semantic content model if you want to deliver omnichannel content. Delivery channels must be able to comprehend the same content in order to use it across multiple marketing channels. For instance, if your content model provided a list of questions and answers, it could be easily displayed on a frequently asked questions ( FAQ ) page as well, but it could also be used by a bot that answers frequently asked questions.

    For example, using a semantic content model for articles, events, people, and locations lets A List Apart provide cleanly structured data for search engines so that users can read the content on the website, in Google knowledge panels, and even with hypothetical voice interfaces in the future.

    Content models that connect

    Instead of slicing up related content across disparate content components, I’ve come to the realization that the best models are those that are semantic and also connect related content components ( such as a FAQ item’s question and answer pair ). A good content model connects content that should remain together so that multiple delivery channels can use it without needing to first put those pieces back together.

    Write an essay or article about it. The unity of an article’s parts determines its meaning and usefulness. Would one of the headings or paragraphs be meaningful on their own without the context of the full article? Our well-known design-system thinking on our project frequently led us to want to develop content models that would divide content into distinct chunks to fit the web-centric layout. Similar effects could have been felt to an article that had its headline removed. Because we were slicing content into standalone pieces based on layout, content that belonged together became difficult to manage and nearly impossible for multiple delivery channels to understand.

    Let’s take a look at how connecting related content works in a real-world setting to illustrate. A complex layout for a software product page that included multiple tabs and sections was presented by the client’s design team. Our instincts were to follow suit with the content model. Shouldn’t we make adding any number of tabs in the future as simple and flexible as possible?

    We felt like we needed a content type called “tab section” because our design-system instincts were so well-known, so that multiple tab sections could be added to a page. Each tab section would display various types of content. The software’s overview or specifications might be available in one tab. A second tab might provide a list of sources.

    Our inclination to break down the content model into “tab section” pieces would have led to an unnecessarily complex model and a cumbersome editing experience, and it would have also created content that couldn’t have been understood by additional delivery channels. How would a different system have been able to determine which “tab section” referred to a product’s specifications or resource list, for instance? Would that system have had to have used tab sections and content blocks to calculate this? This would have prevented the tabs from ever being rearranged, and logic would have had to be added to each other delivery channel to interpret the layout of the design system. Furthermore, if the customer were to have no longer wanted to display this content in a tab layout, it would have been tedious to migrate to a new content model to reflect the new page redesign.

    Our customer had a breakthrough when we realized that for each tab, a specific purpose in mind would be revealed, such as the software product’s overview, specifications, related resources, and pricing. Once implementation began, our inclination to focus on what’s visual and familiar had obscured the intent of the designs. It wasn’t long after a little digging that the content model didn’t like the idea of tabs. What was important was the meaning of the content they were planning to display in the tabs.

    In fact, the customer could have decided to display this content in a different way—without tabs—somewhere else. Based on the meaningful attributes the customer had desired to display on the web, we created content types for the software product. There were rich attributes like screenshots, software requirements, and feature lists as well as obvious semantic attributes like name and description. The software’s product information stayed together because it wasn’t sliced across separate components like “tab sections” that were derived from the content’s presentation. Any delivery channel, including those that follow, could comprehend and display this content.

    Conclusion

    In this omnichannel marketing project, we discovered that the best way to keep our content model on track was to ensure that it was semantic ( with type and attribute names that reflected the meaning of the content ) and that it kept content together that belonged together ( instead of fragmenting it ). These two ideas made it easier for us to decide what to do with the content model based on the design. Remember: If you’re developing a content model to support an omnichannel content strategy, or even if you just want to make sure that Google and other interfaces understand your content, keep in mind:

    • A design system isn’t a content model. Team members may be persuaded to combine them and have their content model resemble their design system, so you should guard the semantic and contextual integrity of the content strategy throughout the entire implementation process. Without the use of a magic decoder ring, every delivery channel will be able to consume the content.
    • If your team is struggling to make this transition, you can still reap some of the benefits by using Schema. structured data from org–based on your website. The benefit of search engine optimization is a compelling reason on its own, even if additional delivery channels aren’t on the horizon in the near future.
    • Additionally, remind the team that decoupling the content model from the design will let them update the designs more easily because they won’t be held back by the cost of content migrations. They will be prepared for the upcoming big thing, and they will be able to create new designs without compromising compatibility between the design and the content.

    By firmly defending these ideas, you’ll help your team view content as the most important component of your user experience and as the most effective way to engage with your audience.

  • How to Sell UX Research with Two Simple Questions

    How to Sell UX Research with Two Simple Questions

    Do you find yourself creating panels by hazy conclusions about how the components on the screen and the rest of the program interact? Do you keep client meetings with vague directives that often seem to contradict past conversations? You are aware that better understanding of user needs may aid the team in becoming clear about what they are trying to accomplish, but time and money are strong for research. When it comes to asking for more immediate contact with your clients, you may feel like bad Oliver Twist, cautiously asking,” Choose, sir, I want some more”.

    Here’s the strategy. You must engage stakeholders to determine high-risk conclusions and buried complexity, so that they can become just as motivated as you are to receive responses from users. Generally, you need to make them think it’s their plan.

    By bringing the group up around two straightforward issues, I’ll show you how to collectively introduce alignment and cracks in the group’s shared understanding in this article.

    1. What are the materials?
    2. What are the associations between those things?

    A cross between screen design and analysis

    These two issues correlate to the first two methods of the ORCA approach, which may be your new best friend when it comes to reducing speculation. Delay, what’s ORCA? Glad you asked.

    ORCA stands for Things, Relationships, CTAs, and Values, and it outlines a process for creating good object-oriented user experience. My style idea is oriented UX. ORCA is an iterative strategy for synthesizing person study into an elegant fundamental foundation to help monitor and conversation design. My work as a UX designer has become more creative, productive, successful, fun, proper, and meaningful thanks to OOUX and ORCA.

    The ORCA process has four iterative rounds and a whopping fifteen steps. In each round we get more clarity on our Os, Rs, Cs, and As.

    I occasionally refer to ORCA as a “garbage in, garbage out” procedure. To ensure that the testable prototype produced in the final round actually tests well, the process needs to be fed by good research. The beginning of the ORCA process, however, serves another purpose: it helps you sell the need for research if you don’t have a ton of research.

    In other words, the ORCA process serves as a gauntlet between research and design. You can gracefully ride the killer whale from research to design with good research. But without good research, the process effectively spits you back into research and with a cache of specific open questions.

    Getting back in the same curiosity-boat

    What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.

    Mark Twain

    The first two steps of the ORCA process—Object Discovery and Relationship Discovery—shine a spotlight on the dark, dusty corners of your team’s misalignments and any inherent complexity that’s been swept under the rug. It begins to reveal what this timeless comic so skillfully demonstrates:

    This is one reason why so many UX designers are frustrated in their job and why many projects fail. Every decision-maker is confident in their own mental picture, which is another reason why we frequently can’t sell research.

    Once we expose hidden fuzzy patches in each picture and the differences between them all, the case for user research makes itself.

    However, it is crucial how we go about doing this. However much we might want to, we can’t just tell everyone,” YOU ARE WRONG”! Instead, we need to facilitate and guide our team members to self-identify holes in their picture. When stakeholders accept responsibility for their beliefs and understanding gaps, BAM! Suddenly, UX research is not such a hard sell, and everyone is aboard the same curiosity-boat.

    Let’s say your users are physicians. And you have no idea how doctors use the system you are tasked with redesigning.

    You might try to sell research by honestly saying:” We need to understand doctors better! What are their issues? How do they use the current app”? But here’s the issue with that. Those questions are vague, and the answers to them don’t feel acutely actionable.

    Instead, you want your stakeholders themselves to ask super-specific questions. This is more similar to the conversation you need to facilitate. Let’s listen in:

    ” Wait a sec, how frequently do doctors share patients?” Does a patient in this system have primary and secondary doctors”?

    ” Can a patient even have more than one primary doctor”?

    Is it a “primary doctor” or just a “primary caregiver” ?Can’t that position be considered a nurse practitioner?

    ” No, caregivers are something else… That’s the patient’s family contacts, right”?

    ” So are caregivers in this redesign’s scope”?

    ” Yeah, because if a caregiver is present at an appointment, the doctor needs to note that. Like, tag the caregiver on the note… Or on the appointment”?

    We are currently traveling somewhere. Do you see how powerful it can be getting stakeholders to debate these questions themselves? Here, the diabolical goal is to diplomatically and diplomatically shake their confidence.

    When these kinds of questions bubble up collaboratively and come directly from the mouths of your stakeholders and decision-makers, suddenly, designing screens without knowing the answers to these questions seems incredibly risky, even silly.

    If we create software without understanding the real-world information environment of our users, we will likely create software that does not align to the real-world information environment of our users. And most likely as a result, this software product will become more confusing, complicated, and unintuitive.

    The two questions

    But how do we approach these kinds of contentious inquiries diplomatically, effectively, collaboratively, and reliably?

    We can do this by starting with those two big questions that align to the first two steps of the ORCA process:

    1. What are the materials?
    2. What are the associations between those things?

    In practice, getting to these answers is easier said than done. I’m going to demonstrate how an Object Definition Workshop can be organized using these two straightforward questions. During this workshop, these” seed” questions will blossom into dozens of specific questions and shine a spotlight on the need for more user research.

    Noun foraging prep work

    In the next section, I’ll show you how to run an Object Definition Workshop with your stakeholders ( and entire cross-functional team, hopefully ). But first, you need to do some prep work.

    In essence, look for nouns that are specific to the subject matter of your project’s business or industry and use at least a few sources. I call this noun foraging.

    Just a few excellent noun foraging sources can be found here:

    • the product’s marketing site
    • the product’s competitors ‘ marketing sites ( competitive analysis, anyone? )
    • the already-existing product ( check the labels! )!
    • user interview transcripts
    • notes from interviews with stakeholders or vision documents from stakeholders

    Put your detective hat on, my dear Watson. Get resourceful and leverage what you have. Use those if all you have is a marketing website, some screenshots of the current legacy system, and access to customer service chat logs.

    As you peruse these sources, watch for the nouns that are used over and over again, and start listing them ( preferably on blue sticky notes if you’ll be creating an object map later! …

    You’ll want to focus on nouns that might represent objects in your system. If you are having trouble determining if a noun might be object-worthy, remember the acronym SIP and test for:

    1. Structure
    2. Instances
    3. Purpose

    Consider a library app, for instance. Is “book” an object?

    Can you think of a few attributes for this potential object? Title, author, publish date … Yep, it has structure. Check!

    What are some illustrations of this potential “book” object, for instance? Can you name a few? Check out The Alchemist, Ready Player One, and Everybody Poops!

    Purpose: why is this object important to the users and business? Well, “book” is what our library client is providing to people and books are why people come to the library … Check, check, check!

    Focus on capturing the nouns that have SIP as you are noun foraging. Avoid capturing components like dropdowns, checkboxes, and calendar pickers—your UX system is not your design system! Components are just the packaging for objects—they are a means to an end. No one is using your dropdown to play in your digital space! They are coming for the VALUABLE THINGS and what they can do with them. We are attempting to identify those things or objects.

    Let’s say we work for a startup disrupting the email experience. This is how I’d start my noun foraging.

    I’d like to take a look at my own email client, which turns out to be Gmail. I’d then look at Outlook and the new HEY email. I’d check out Hotmail, Yahoo, and even Slack and Basecamp and other’email replacers’. I’d read some articles, reviews, and forum threads where people are complaining about email. While doing all this, I would look for and write down the nouns.

    ( Before moving on, feel free to explore this hypothetical product’s potential and then scroll down to see how closely our lists correspond. Just don’t get lost in your own emails! Remain with me!

    Drumroll, please…

    Here are a few nouns I came up with during my noun foraging:

    • email message
    • thread
    • contact
    • client
    • rule/automation
    • email address that is not a contact?
    • contact organizations
    • attachment
    • Google doc file / other integrated file
    • newsletter? ( HEY views this in a different way )
    • saved responses and templates

    Scan your list of nouns and pick out words that you are completely clueless about. It might be automation or a client in our email example. Do as much homework as you can before your session with stakeholders: google what’s googleable. But other terms might be so specific to the product or domain that you need to have a conversation about them.

    Aside: Here are some authentic nouns that my stakeholders in my own past project work needed to clarify:

    • Record Locator
    • Home of Incentive
    • Augmented Line Item
    • Curriculum-Based Measurement Probe

    A list of nouns that represent potential objects and a short list of nouns that need to be further defined are really all you need to prepare for the workshop session.

    Facilitate an Object Definition Workshop

    Noun foraging can be used as a starting point for your workshop; it can be done in concert. If you have five people in the room, pick five sources, assign one to every person, and give everyone ten minutes to find the objects within their source. When the time’s up, come together and find the overlap. Here, affinity mapping is your friend!

    If your team is short on time and might be reluctant to do this kind of grunt work ( which is usually the case ) do your own noun foraging beforehand, but be prepared to show your work. I enjoy showing screenshots of documents and screens that have all the highlighted nouns. Bring the artifacts of your process, and start the workshop with a five-minute overview of your noun foraging journey.

    HOT TIP: before jumping into the workshop, frame the conversation as a requirements-gathering session to help you better understand the scope and details of the system. We’ll keep that a secret; you just need to let them know that you‘re looking for gaps in the team’s understanding so that you can demonstrate the need for more user research. Instead, go into the session optimistically, as if your knowledgeable stakeholders and PMs and biz folks already have all the answers.

    Let the whack-a-mole question then begin.

    1. What is this thing?

    Want some genuine fun? At the beginning of your session, ask stakeholders to privately write definitions for the handful of obscure nouns you might be uncertain about. Then, have everyone present their cards at once, and see if you get different definitions (you will ). This is gold for exposing misalignment and starting great conversations.

    As your discussion unfolds, capture any agreed-upon definitions. And when uncertainty sets in, quietly ( but clearly ) begin an “open questions” parking lot. � �

    Here’s a fantastic follow-up after definitions solidify:

    2. Do our users know what these things are? What do users refer to this as?

    Stakeholder 1: They probably call email clients “apps”. But I’m not certain.

    Stakeholder 2: Automations are often called “workflows”, I think. Or, maybe users think workflows are something different.

    Ask the group if they can agree to use only that term as they go along if a more user-friendly term comes up. This way, the team can better align to the users ‘ language and mindset.

    Okay, let’s get to the next part.

    If you have two or more objects that seem to overlap in purpose, ask one of these questions:

    3. Are these the same thing? Or are these different? What distinguishes them from one another if they are different?

    You: Is a saved response the same as a template?

    Stakeholder 1: Yes! Without a doubt.

    Stakeholder 2: I don’t think so… A saved response is text with links and variables, but a template is more about the look and feel, like default fonts, colors, and placeholder images.

    Continue to expand your expanding glossary of terms. And continue to capture areas of uncertainty in your “open questions” parking lot.

    If you successfully determine that two similar things are, in fact, different, here’s your next follow-up question:

    4. What’s the relationship between these objects?

    You: Do saved responses and templates have any connection to each other?

    Stakeholder 3: Yeah, a template can be applied to a saved response.

    You, always with the follow-ups: When is the template applied to a saved response? When the user is creating the saved response, does that occur? Or when they apply the saved response to an email? What is the process behind that?

    Listen. Capture uncertainty. When the number of “open questions” reaches a critical mass, pause and begin asking questions of groups or individuals. Some questions might be for the dev team ( hopefully at least one developer is in the room with you ). Someone who couldn’t make it to the workshop might have a question. And many questions will need to be labeled “user”.

    Do you see how we are building up to our UXR sales pitch?

    5. Is this object in scope?

    Your next query makes the team’s attention narrower so that it can focus on what your users are most interested in. You can simply ask,” Are saved responses in scope for our first release”?, but I’ve got a better, more devious strategy.

    By now, you should have a list of clearly defined objects. Ask participants to arrange these items either in small breakout groups or independently according to their importance. Then, like you did with the definitions, have everyone reveal their sort order at once. Unsurprisingly, it’s not unusual for the VP to place something like” saved responses” at the top of the list while everyone else places it at the bottom. Try not to look too smug as you inevitably expose more misalignment.

    I did this for a startup a few years ago. The three groups ‘ wildly different sorting patterns were displayed on the whiteboard.

    The CEO sat back, examined it, and said,” This is why we haven’t been able to move forward in two years.”

    Admittedly, it’s tragic to hear that, but as a professional, it feels pretty awesome to be the one who facilitated a watershed realization.

    Once you have a good idea of in-scope, clearly defined things, this is when you move on to doing more relationship mapping.

    6. Create a visual representation of the objects ‘ relationships

    We’ve already tried to figure out what two things are different, but this time, we wanted to ask the team about every possible relationship. For each object, ask how it relates to all the other objects. In what ways are the objects connected? Pull out your dependable boxes and arrows technique to see all the connections. Here, we are connecting our objects with verbs. I prefer to use simple statements like “has a” and “has many.”

    This system modeling activity brings up all sorts of new questions:

    • Can attachments be included in a saved response?
    • Can a saved response use a template? If so, can the user override the template if an email uses a saved response with a template?
    • Do users want to see all the emails they sent that included a particular attachment? For example,” show me all the emails I sent with ProfessionalImage. attached .jpg I’ve changed my professional photo and I want to alert everyone to update it”.

    Strong responses might come directly from the workshop participants. Great! Capture that new shared understanding. However, keep adding questions to your expanding parking lot as uncertainty arises.

    Light the fuse

    You’ve set up the floodgates strategically so that the explosives can be seen everywhere. Now you simply have to light the fuse and BOOM. Watch the buy-in for user research flooooow.

    Have the group reflect on the list of open questions before the workshop ends. Make plans for getting answers internally, then focus on the questions that need to be brought before users.

    Here’s your final move. Take those questions you’ve compiled for user research and discuss the level of risk associated with NOT answering them. Ask, “if we design without an answer to this question, if we make up our own answer and we are wrong, how bad might that turn out”?

    With this approach, we are making our decision-makers fight for user research because they themselves define questions as high-risk. Sorry, not sorry.

    Your moment of truth is right now. With everyone in the room, ask for a reasonable budget of time and money to conduct 6–8 user interviews focused specifically on these questions.

    HOT TIP: if you are new to UX research, please note that you’ll likely need to rephrase the questions that came up during the workshop before you present them to users. Make sure your questions are non-repeated and don’t force the user to choose any default responses.

    Final words: Hold the screen design!

    Seriously, if at all possible, never design screens again without first addressing the fundamental inquiries: what are the objects and how do they relate?

    I promise you this: if you can secure a shared understanding between the business, design, and development teams before you start designing screens, you will have less heartache and save more time and money, and ( it almost feels like a bonus at this point! ) users will be more receptive to what you put out into the world.

    I sincerely hope this will give you the time and money to spend talking to your users and getting a clear understanding of what you are designing before you begin creating screens. If you find success using noun foraging and the Object Definition Workshop, there’s more where that came from in the rest of the ORCA process, which will help prevent even more late-in-the-game scope tugs-of-war and strategy pivots.

    Wish you the best of luck! Now go sell research!

  • Breaking Out of the Box

    Breaking Out of the Box

    CSS is all about design containers. In fact, the whole website is made of containers, from the computer viewport to components on a webpage. However, every now and then a new element appears that prompts us to reevaluate our design philosophy.

    Square features, for instance, make it fun to play with round picture areas. Mobile display holes and electronic keyboards offer issues to best manage content that stays clear of them. Additionally, dual-screen or portable devices force us to consider how to make the most of the available space in various device configurations.

    The design of products has become more challenging and interesting as a result of new changes to the web platform. They’re wonderful opportunities for us to break out of our rectangular boxes.

    I’d like to talk about a new feature similar to the above: the Window Controls Overlay for Progressive Web Apps ( PWAs ).

    Democratic Web Apps are bridging the gap between websites and apps. They combine the best of both worlds. On the one hand, they are flexible, shareable, and stable, just like websites. On the other hand, they provide more effective features, work online, and read documents just like local apps.

    As a style area, PWAs are really exciting because they challenge us to think about what mixing online and device-native user interface can get. We have more than 40 years of experience telling us what applications should look like on desktop devices in particular, and it can be challenging to get out of this mental model.

    At the end of the day though, PWAs on desktop are constrained to the window they appear in: a rectangle with a title bar at the top.

    What does a typical desktop PWA app look like:

    Sure, as the author of a PWA, you get to choose the color of the title bar (using the Web Application Manifest theme_color property ), but that’s about it.

    What if we could look beyond this box and reclaim the entire window of the app? Doing so would give us a chance to make our apps more beautiful and feel more integrated in the operating system.

    This is exactly what the Window Controls Overlay provides. This new PWA functionality makes it possible to take advantage of the full surface area of the app, including where the title bar normally appears.

    About the title bar and window controls

    Let’s get started with an explanation of the title bar and window controls.

    The title bar is the area displayed at the top of an app window, which usually contains the app’s name. The buttons or buttons that are displayed at the top of an app’s window allow you to minimize, maximize, or close it.

    Window Controls Overlay removes the physical constraint of the title bar and window controls areas. It frees up the entire app window’s height, allowing the overlay of the title bar and window control buttons on top of the application’s web content.

    If you are reading this article on a desktop computer, take a quick look at other apps. Chances are they’re already doing something similar to this. The top area of the page is used by the web browser you’re using to read this, in fact.

    Spotify displays album artwork to the top of the application window all the way up.

    Microsoft Word uses the available title bar space to display the auto-save and search functionalities, and more.

    The whole point of this feature is to allow you to make use of this space with your own content while providing a way to account for the window control buttons. And it makes it possible to offer this modified experience across a variety of platforms without having a negative impact on browsers or other devices that don’t support Window Controls Overlay. After all, PWAs are all about progressive enhancement, so this feature is a chance to enhance your app to use this extra space when it’s available.

    Let’s use the feature.

    For the rest of this article, we’ll be working on a demo app to learn more about using the feature.

    The demo app is called 1DIV. Users can create designs using CSS and a single HTML element in a simple CSS playground.

    The app has two pages. The first lists the CSS designs you’ve already created:

    The second page enables you to create and edit CSS designs:

    We can install the app as a PWA on the desktop because I added a straightforward web manifest and service worker. Here is what it looks like on macOS:

    And on Windows:

    Our app is looking good, but the white title bar in the first page is wasted space. It would be really nice if the design area extended to the top of the app window on the second page.

    Let’s use the Window Controls Overlay feature to improve this.

    enabling overlay for window control

    The feature is still experimental at the moment. To try it, you need to enable it in one of the supported browsers.

    It has currently been implemented in Chromium as a result of a collaboration between Microsoft and Google. We can therefore use it in Chrome or Edge by going to the internal about: //flags page, and enabling the Desktop PWA Window Controls Overlay flag.

    Using Window Controls Overlay

    To use the feature, we need to add the following display_override member to our web app’s manifest file:

    { "name": "1DIV", "description": "1DIV is a mini CSS playground", "lang": "en-US", "start_url": "/", "theme_color": "#ffffff", "background_color": "#ffffff", "display_override": [ "window-controls-overlay" ], "icons": [ ... ]}

    On the surface, the feature is really simple to use. The only thing we need to change is this manifest change, which will make the title bar disappear and convert the window controls into an overlay.

    However, to provide a great experience for all users regardless of what device or browser they use, and to make the most of the title bar area in our design, we’ll need a bit of CSS and JavaScript code.

    What the current state of the app is:

    Our logo, search field, and NEW button are now partially obscured by the window controls because our layout now begins at the top of the window, which is what we wanted.

    It’s similar on Windows, with the difference that the close, maximize, and minimize buttons appear on the right side, grouped together with the PWA control buttons:

    Screenshot of the Windows operating system’s Window Controls Overlay-enabled 1DIV app thumbnail display. The separate top bar area is gone, but the window controls are now blocking some of the app’s content.

    Using CSS to keep clear of the window controls

    New CSS environment variables have also been added in addition to the feature:

    • titlebar-area-x
    • titlebar-area-y
    • titlebar-area-width
    • titlebar-area-height

    You use these variables with the CSS env ( ) function to position your content where the title bar would have been while ensuring it won’t overlap with the window controls. We’ll position our header, which includes the logo, search bar, and NEW button, using two of the variables in our case.

    header { position: absolute; left: env(titlebar-area-x, 0); width: env(titlebar-area-width, 100%); height: var(--toolbar-height);}

    The titlebar-area-x variable gives us the distance from the left of the viewport to where the title bar would appear, and titlebar-area-width is its width. (Remember, this is not equivalent to the width of the entire viewport, just the title bar portion, which as noted earlier, doesn’t include the window controls.)

    By doing this, we make sure our content remains fully visible. We’re also defining fallback values (the second parameter in the env() function) for when the variables are not defined (such as on non-supporting browsers, or when the Windows Control Overlay feature is disabled).

    Now our header adapts to its surroundings, and it doesn’t feel like the window control buttons have been added as an afterthought. The app appears much more like a native app.

    Changing the window controls background color so it blends in

    Now let’s take a closer look at our second page: the CSS playground editor.

    Not very good. Our CSS demo area does go all the way to the top, which is what we wanted, but the way the window controls appear as white rectangles on top of it is quite jarring.

    We can fix this by changing the app’s theme color. There are several definitions for it:

      PWAs can define a theme color in the web app manifest file using the theme_color manifest member. The OS then uses this color in various ways. On desktop platforms, it is used to provide a background color to the title bar and window controls.
    • Websites can use the theme-color meta tag as well. It’s used by browsers to customize the color of the UI around the web page. For PWAs, this color can override the manifest theme_color.

    In our case, we can set the manifest theme_color to white to provide the right default color for our app. The OS will read this color value when the app is installed and use it to make the window controls background color white. This color works great for our main page with the list of demos.

    The theme-color meta tag can be changed at runtime, using JavaScript. So we can do that to override the white with the right demo background color when one is opened.

    What will we do with this function:

    function themeWindow(bgColor) { document.querySelector("meta[name=theme-color]").setAttribute('content', bgColor);}

    With this in place, we can imagine how using color and CSS transitions can produce a smooth change from the list page to the demo page, and enable the window control buttons to blend in with the rest of the app’s interface.

    Dragging the window

    Now, getting rid of the title bar entirely does have an important accessibility consequence: it’s much more difficult to move the application window around.

    Users can use the Window Controls Overlay feature to move the window, but this area becomes limited to where the control buttons are, and they must very precisely aim between these buttons to move the window. However, the title bar offers a sizable area for users to click and drag.

    Fortunately, this can be fixed using CSS with the app-region property. This property is, for now, only supported in Chromium-based browsers and needs the -webkit- vendor prefix. 

    We can use the following to make any feature of the app a dragging target for the window:

    -webkit-app-region: drag;

    It is also possible to explicitly make an element non-draggable:

    -webkit-app-region: no-drag; 

    These choices might be beneficial to us. We can make the entire header a dragging target, but make the search field and NEW button within it non-draggable so they can still be used as normal.

    However, because the editor page doesn’t display the header, users wouldn’t be able to drag the window while editing code. So let’s take a different strategy. We’ll create another element before our header, also absolutely positioned, and dedicated to dragging the window.

    ...
    .drag { position: absolute; top: 0; width: 100%; height: env(titlebar-area-height, 0); -webkit-app-region: drag;}

    With the above code, we’re making the draggable area span the entire viewport width, and using the titlebar-area-height variable to make it as tall as what the title bar would have been. This way, our draggable area is aligned with the window control buttons as shown below.

    And, now, to make sure our search field and button remain usable:

    header .search,header .new { -webkit-app-region: no-drag;}

    Users can click and drag where the title bar used to be using the above code. It is an area that users expect to be able to use to move windows on desktop, and we’re not breaking this expectation, which is good.

    Adapting to window resize

    It may be useful for an app to know both whether the window controls overlay is visible and when its size changes. In our situation, there won’t be enough room for the search field, logo, and button to fit because the user made the window very narrow. We would need to lower them a little.

    The Window Controls Overlay feature comes with a JavaScript API we can use to do this: navigator.windowControlsOverlay.

    The API offers three intriguing features:

    • navigator.windowControlsOverlay.visiblelets us know whether the overlay is visible.
    • navigator.windowControlsOverlay.getBoundingClientRect()lets us know the position and size of the title bar area.
    • navigator.windowControlsOverlay.ongeometrychangelets us know when something changes in size or visibility.

    Let’s use this to be aware of the size of the title bar area and move the header down if it’s too narrow.

    if (navigator.windowControlsOverlay) { navigator.windowControlsOverlay.addEventListener('geometrychange', () => { const { width } = navigator.windowControlsOverlay.getBoundingClientRect(); document.body.classList.toggle('narrow', width < 250); });}

    In the example above, we set the narrow class on the body of the app if the title bar area is narrower than 250px. We could do something similar with a media query, but using the windowControlsOverlay API has two advantages for our use case:

    • It’s only fired when the feature is supported and used, we don’t want to adapt the design otherwise.
    • We can see the title bar area across different operating systems, which is great because the window controls ‘ size is different on Mac and Windows. Using a media query wouldn’t make it possible for us to know exactly how much space remains.
    .narrow header { top: env(titlebar-area-height, 0); left: 0; width: 100%;}

    When the window is too small, we can move the header down using the above CSS code to avoid hitting the window control buttons, and we can also lower the thumbnails accordingly.

    Thirty pixels of exciting design opportunities


    We were able to convert our simple demo app to something that felt much more connected to desktop devices by using the Window Controls Overlay feature. Something that reaches out of the usual window constraints and provides a custom experience for its users.

    In reality, this feature only gives us about 30 more pixels of room, and it presents challenges for using the window controls. And yet, this extra room and those challenges can be turned into exciting design opportunities.

    More devices of all shapes and forms get invented all the time, and the web keeps on evolving to adapt to them. New features are added to the web platform to make it easier for web authors to integrate more and more fully with those devices. From watches or foldable devices to desktop computers, we need to evolve our design approach for the web. We can now think beyond the rectangular box when building for the web.

    So let’s embrace this. Let’s use the standard technologies already at our disposal, and experiment with new ideas to provide tailored experiences for all devices, all from a single codebase!


    You can report bugs to the spec’s repository if you have the chance to try the Window Controls Overlay feature and have feedback on it. It’s still early in the development of this feature, and you can help make it even better. Or you can look at this demo app and its source code, the feature’s existing documentation, or the feature’s existing documentation.

  • Designers, (Re)define Success First

    Designers, (Re)define Success First

    About two and a half years before, I introduced the concept of normal social style. It was born out of my disappointment with the many obstacles to achieving style that’s accessible and equal, protects people’s protection, firm, and target, benefits society, and restores nature. I argued that we must overcome the difficulties that prevent us from acting morally and that we must functionally integrate design ethics into our daily routine, procedures, and tools to raise it to a more realistic level.

    However, we’re still very far from this perfect.

    At the time, I didn’t realize yet how to functionally incorporate morality. Yes, I did discover some tools in past projects that had worked for me, such as using checklists, notion tracking, and “dark fact” sessions, but I wasn’t able to use them in every task. I was still struggling for time and support, and at best I had only partially achieved a higher ( moral ) quality of design—which is far from my definition of structurally integrated.

    I made the decision to investigate deeper the causes of organization that prevent us from practicing regular social style. Today, after much research and experimentation, I believe that I’ve found the code that will let us functionally combine morality. And it’s remarkably easy! However, we must second move out to understand what we’re going through.

    Control the system

    Unfortunately, the capitalist system, which promotes commercialism and inequality, is obsessed with the utopian dream of infinite growth. Sea levels, temperature, and our demand for energy continue to rise unquestioned, while the divide between rich and poor continues to increase. Owners expect ever-higher returns on their investments, and firms feel forced to set short-term goals that reflect this. Over the past few decades, those goals have transformed our well-meaning human-centered mentality into a potent tool that encourages ever-higher levels of consumption. When we’re working for an organization that pursues “double-digit growth” or “aggressive sales targets” ( which is 99 percent of us ), that’s very hard to resist while remaining human friendly. We’re a part of the problem, yet with our best intentions, and we’re doing it despite our best efforts to suggest that we provide solutions for people.

    What can we do to alter this?

    We may begin by acting on the appropriate level of the system. A system intellectual named Donna H. Meadows after outlined ways to influence a system in order of success. When you apply these to architecture, you get:

      You can change things like usability ratings or the number of style critiques at the least effective level. But none of that may change the direction of a business.
    • Similarly, affecting buffers ( such as team budgets ), stocks ( such as the number of designers ), flows ( such as the number of new hires ), and delays ( such as the time that it takes to hear about the effect of design ) won’t significantly affect a company.
    • A business can improve its ability to achieve its goals by concentrating instead on administration control, employee recognition, or design-system purchases. But that doesn’t alter the goals themselves, which means that the business may also work against your ethical-design ideals.
    • The change of moral methods, toolkits, articles, conferences, workshops, and other topics are what most ethical-design initiatives are currently focusing on at the next level, details flows. This is also where moral style has remained largely theoretical. We’ve been focusing on the wrong level of the system all this day.
    • Get rules, for instance; they consistently surpass information. There can be commonly accepted guidelines, such as how fund works, or a sprint group’s concept of done. However, illegal laws intended to maintain income, frequently revealed through comments like” the customer didn’t ask for it” or “don’t make it too big” can smother social style.
    • Changing the rules without holding formal power is extremely difficult. That’s why the next stage is thus important: self-organization. Research, bottom-up initiatives, love projects, self-steering teams, and other such self-organization techniques all contribute to a company’s resilience and creativity. It’s precisely this diversity of viewpoints that’s needed to functionally address major structural issues like materialism, money injustice, and climate change.
    • But goals and measures are even more powerful than self-organization. Our businesses want to make more cash, which means that everything and everyone in the business does their best to… make the company more money. And when I realized that income is nothing more than a dimension, I understood how important a very particular, defined measurement may be toward pushing a company in a particular direction.

    What is the conclusion? If we truly want to incorporate ethics into our daily design practice, we must first change the measurable objectives of the company we work for, from the bottom up.

    Redefine success

    Traditionally, we consider a product or service successful if it’s desirable to humans, technologically feasible, and financially viable. You tend to see these represented as equals, if you type the three words in a search engine, you’ll find diagrams of three equally sized, evenly arranged circles.

    However, we all know that the three dimensions are not equally important: viability is ultimately what determines whether a product will become operational. So a more realistic representation might look like this:

    The means are feasibility and desire, and viability is the aim. Companies—outside of nonprofits and charities—exist to make money.

    A genuinely purpose-driven company would try to reverse this dynamic: it would recognize finance for what it was intended for: a means. Therefore, both the company’s goals and its viability are important in order to realize what they are trying to accomplish. It makes intuitive sense: to achieve most anything, you need resources, people, and money. Fun fact: the Italian language is completely unaware of the differences between feasibility and viability; both are merely fattibilità.

    But simply swapping viable for desirable isn’t enough to achieve an ethical outcome. Desirability is still linked to consumerism because the associated activities aim to identify what people want—whether it’s good for them or not. When deciding whether a product is safe for people, such as user satisfaction or conversion, durability goals are unimportant. They don’t prevent us from creating products that distract or manipulate people or stop us from contributing to society’s wealth inequality. They are unsuitable for striking a healthy balance with the natural world.

    There’s a fourth dimension of success that’s missing: our designs also need to be ethical in the effect that they have on the world.

    This is hardly a new idea. There are many variations of these models, some calling the fourth dimension accountability, integrity, or responsibility. What I’ve never seen before, however, is the necessary step that comes after: to influence the system as designers and to make ethical design more practical, we must create objectives for ethical design that are achievable and inspirational. There is no single way to accomplish this because it depends greatly on your country’s values, culture, and industry. But I’ll give you the version that I developed with a group of colleagues at a design agency. Consider it a template to get started.

    Ensure social justice, equity, and sustainability.

    We created objectives that address design’s effect on three levels: individual, societal, and global.

    An objective on the individual level teaches us that success transcends the typical area of focus on usability and satisfaction, taking into account factors like how much time and effort are required from users. We pursued well-being:

    We create products and services that allow for people’s health and happiness. Our solutions are non-misleading, transparent, and calm. We respect our users ‘ time, attention, and privacy, and help them make healthy and respectful choices.

    We must consider our impact beyond the user, widening our focus to the economy, communities, and other indirect stakeholders, as a result of establishing an objective on the societal level. We called this objective equity:

    We create products and services that have a positive social impact. We think of racial justice, inclusiveness and diversity of people as teams, users, and customer segments as indicators of economic equality. We listen to local culture, communities, and those we affect.

    Finally, the global goal on the global level aims to keep us in harmony with our only true home, humanity. Referring to it simply as sustainability, our definition was:

    We create products and services that reward sufficiency and reusability. Our solutions promote the circular economy by generating value from waste, reusing products, and giving priority to sustainable choices. We deliver functionality instead of ownership, and we limit energy use.

    In essence, ethical design ( to us ) meant achieving well-being for each user and an equitable value distribution within society through a design that can sustain our living planet. When we introduced these objectives in the company, for many colleagues, design ethics and responsible design suddenly became tangible and achievable through practical—and even familiar—actions.

    Measure impact

    However, defining these goals is still insufficient. What truly caught the attention of senior management was the fact that we created a way to measure every design project’s well-being, equity, and sustainability.

    This overview provides examples of metrics you can use to measure your progress toward equity, well-being, and sustainability:

    There’s a lot of power in measurement. As the saying goes, what gets measured gets done. This example was once shared by Donella Meadows:

    ” If the desired system state is national security, and that is defined as the amount of money spent on the military, the system will produce military spending. It may or may not lead to national security.

    This phenomenon explains why desirability is a poor indicator of success: it’s typically defined as the increase in customer satisfaction, session length, frequency of use, conversion rate, churn rate, download rate, and so on. But none of these metrics increase the health of people, communities, or ecosystems. What if we instead used ( reduced ) screen time or software energy consumption to measure success?

    There’s another important message here. If we set an objective to create a calm interface, we might still end up with a screen that makes people anxious, even if we set the wrong metric for calmness, such as the number of interface elements. Choosing the wrong metric can completely undo good intentions.

    Additionally, choosing the right metric is enormously helpful in focusing the design team. Once you complete the task of selecting metrics for our goals, you are forced to consider what success looks like in terms of words and how you can demonstrate that you’ve accomplished your ethical goals. It also forces you to consider what we as designers have control over: what can I include in my design or change in my process that will lead to the right type of success? The response to this query provides a lot of insight and clarity.

    And finally, it’s good to remember that traditional businesses run on measurements, and managers love to spend much time discussing charts ( ideally hockey-stick shaped ) —especially if they concern profit, the one-above-all of metrics. For good or ill, to improve the system, to have a serious discussion about ethical design with managers, we’ll need to speak that business language.

    daily ethical design

    Once you’ve defined your objectives and you have a reasonable idea of the potential metrics for your design project, only then do you have a chance to structurally practice ethical design. It” simply” becomes a matter of using your imagination and sifting through the knowledge and tools that are already at your disposal.

    I think this is quite exciting! It opens a whole new set of challenges and considerations for the design process. Would a simple illustration suffice, or should you go with that energizing video? Which typeface is the most calm and inclusive? What brand-new equipment and techniques do you employ? When is the website’s end of life? How can you provide the same service while requiring less attention from users? How can you ensure that those who are impacted by decisions are present when they are made? How can you measure our effects?

    The definition of success will fundamentally alter what doing good design entails.

    There is, however, a final piece of the puzzle that’s missing: convincing your client, product owner, or manager to be mindful of well-being, equity, and sustainability. For this, it’s essential to engage stakeholders in a dedicated kickoff session.

    Start it off or return to the pre-existing

    The kickoff is the most important meeting that can be so easy to forget to include. There are two main stages in it: 1 ) coordinating expectations; 2 ) defining success as a goal.

    In the first phase, the entire ( design ) team goes over the project brief and meets with all the relevant stakeholders. Everyone gets to know one another and express their expectations on the outcome and their contributions to achieving it. Possumptions are raised and discussed. The aim is to get on the same level of understanding and to in turn avoid preventable miscommunications and surprises later in the project.

    For instance, we conducted an online kickoff meeting with the client, a subject-matter expert, and two other designers for a recent freelance project that aimed to create a digital platform that facilitates US student advisors ‘ documentation and communication. We used a combination of canvases on Miro: one with questions from” Manual of Me” ( to get to know each other ), a Team Canvas ( to express expectations ), and a version of the Project Canvas to align on scope, timeline, and other practical matters.

    The above is the traditional purpose of a kickoff. However, agreeing on the project’s success means having respect for its desirability, viability, feasibility, and ethics is just as crucial as expressing expectations. What are the objectives in each dimension?

    It’s crucial to reach an understanding of what success means at this early stage because you can depend on it for the duration of the project. If, for example, the design team wants to build an inclusive app for a diverse user group, they can raise diversity as a specific success criterion during the kickoff. If the client agrees, the team can refer back to that promise throughout the project. As we agreed in our first meeting, having a diverse user group that includes A and B is essential to creating a successful product. So we do activity X and follow research process Y”. Compare those odds to a situation where the team had to ask for permission halfway through the project and didn’t agree to it in advance. The client might argue that that came on top of the agreed scope—and she’d be right.

    In the case of this freelance project, to define success I prepared a round canvas that I call the Wheel of Success. An inner ring with the intention of capturing ideas for objectives and an outer ring with the intention of capturing ideas for measuring those objectives are included. The rings are divided into five dimensions of successful design: healthy, equitable, sustainable, desirable, feasible, and viable.

    We explored each dimension and recorded ideas on digital sticky notes. Then we discussed our ideas and verbally agreed on the most important ones. For example, our client agreed that sustainability and progressive enhancement are important success criteria for the platform. Additionally, the subject-matter expert stressed the value of involving students from underprivileged and low-income groups in the design process.

    After the kickoff, we summarized our ideas and shared understanding in a project brief that captured these aspects:

      the project’s history and purpose: Why do we do this project?
    • the problem definition: what do we want to solve?
    • the concrete goals and metrics for each success dimension: what do we want to achieve?
    • the objectives, procedures, and role descriptions: how will we accomplish them?

    With such a brief in place, you can use the agreed-upon objectives and concrete metrics as a checklist of success, and your design team will be ready to pursue the right objective—using the tools, methods, and metrics at their disposal to achieve ethical outcomes.

    Conclusion

    A number of my coworkers have questioned me over the past year,” Where do I begin with ethical design?” My answer has always been the same: organize a session with your stakeholders to ( re ) define success. Even though you might not always be 100 percent successful in agreeing on goals that cover all responsibility objectives, that beats the alternative ( the status quo ) every time. There’s no skipping this step if you want to be an ethical, responsible designer.

    To be even more specific: if you consider yourself a strategic designer, your challenge is to define ethical objectives, set the right metrics, and conduct those kick-off sessions. If you think of yourself as a system designer, you need to first understand how your industry influences consumerism and inequality, how finance drives business, and how to think creatively about how to best influence the system. Then redefine success to create the space to exercise those levers.

    And for those who consider themselves service designers or UX designers or UI designers: if you truly want to have a positive, meaningful impact, stay away from the toolkits and meetups and conferences for a while. Gather your coworkers and instead define design goals for well-being, equity, and sustainability. Engage your stakeholders in a workshop and challenge them to think of ways to achieve and measure those ethical goals. Take their ideas, make them clear and tangible, ask for their consent, and hold them to it.

    Otherwise, I’m genuinely sorry to say, you’re wasting your precious time and creative energy.

    Of course, engaging your stakeholders in this way can be uncomfortable. Many of my coworkers had questions to ask, such as” Will they take this seriously”?,” Will they take it seriously?” and “Can’t we just do it within the design team instead”? In fact, a product manager once asked me why ethics couldn’t just be a structured part of the design process—to just do it without spending the effort to define ethical objectives. It’s a tempting thought, isn’t it? We wouldn’t have to have difficult discussions with stakeholders about what values or which key-performance indicators to pursue. It would let us focus on what we like and do best: designing.

    However, as systems theory suggests, that’s not enough. For those of us who aren’t from marginalized groups and have the privilege to be able to speak up and be heard, that uncomfortable space is exactly where we need to be if we truly want to make a difference. We can’t continue to live in the design-for-designers bubble and enjoy our privileged working-from-home environment without access to the real world. For those of us who have the possibility to speak up and be heard: if we solely keep talking about ethical design and it remains at the level of articles and toolkits—we’re not designing ethically. It’s just theory. By challenging them to redefine success in business, we must actively engage with our coworkers and clients.

    With a bit of courage, determination, and focus, we can break out of this cage that finance and business-as-usual have built around us and become facilitators of a new type of business that can see beyond financial value. We simply need to come to terms with the right goals at the start of each design project, identify the appropriate metrics, and acknowledge that we already have everything in place to begin. That’s what it means to do daily ethical design.

    For their inspiration and support over the years, I would like to thank Emanuela Cozzi Schettini, José Gallegos, Annegret Bönemann, Ian Dorr, Vera Rademaker, Virginia Rispoli, Cecilia Scolaro, Rouzbeh Amini, and many others.

  • Mobile-First CSS: Is It Time for a Rethink?

    Mobile-First CSS: Is It Time for a Rethink?

    The mobile-first style approach is fantastic because it concentrates on what is most important to the customer, it’s well-practiced, and it’s a well-known layout design for years. But developing your CSS mobile-first should also be fantastic, too…right?

    Well, not necessarily. Classic mobile-first CSS development is based on the principle of overwriting style declarations: you begin your CSS with default style declarations, and overwrite and/or add new styles as you add breakpoints with min-width media queries for larger viewports (for a good overview see “What is Mobile First CSS and Why Does It Rock?”). But all those exceptions create complexity and inefficiency, which in turn can lead to an increased testing effort and a code base that’s harder to maintain. Admit it—how many of us willingly want that?

    Mobile-first CSS may yet be the best option for your own projects, but you need to first determine how acceptable it is in light of the physical design and user interactions you’re working on. To help you get started, here’s how I go about tackling the elements you need to watch for, and I’ll discuss some alternative remedies if mobile-first doesn’t seem to fit your job.

    merits of mobile-first technology

    Some of the benefits of mobile-first CSS growth, and why it’s been the de facto growth practice for so long, make a lot of sense:

    Development order. A good development hierarchy is something you can definitely get from mobile-first; you just get developing while paying attention to the mobile view.

    tested and verified. It’s a tried and tested technique that’s worked for years for a cause: it solves a problem actually also.

    emphasizes the cellular viewpoint. The mobile view is the simplest and arguably the most significant because it covers all the crucial user journeys and frequently accounts for a higher proportion of user visits ( depending on the project ) ).

    Prevents desktop-centric growth. It can be tempting to first focus on the desktop perspective because desktop computers are used for growth. However, considering mobile from the beginning prevents us from getting stuck eventually; no one wants to spend their day getting a site that is focused on desktops to work on mobile devices!

    Drawbacks of mobile-first

    Model declarations can be set at higher breakpoints and finally overwritten at higher breakpoints:

    more complicated. The farther up the target order you go, the more unnecessary password you inherit from lower thresholds.

    higher CSS sensitivity A school name declaration’s default style has then a higher specificity that has been returned to the browser’s default value. This can be a pain on big projects when you want to preserve the CSS candidates as simple as possible.

    Requires more analysis assessment. All higher thresholds must be regression tested if changes to CSS at a lower see ( such as adding a new style ) are to be made.

    The browser can’t prioritize CSS downloads. At wider breakpoints, classic mobile-first min-width media queries don’t leverage the browser’s capability to download CSS files in priority order.

    Property price issue overrules its own.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with overwriting beliefs, CSS was designed to do just that. However, inheriting incorrect principles can be laborious and ineffective, which is counterproductive. When you have to replace styles to restore them back to their defaults, which may cause issues after, especially if you are using a combination of bespoke CSS and power classes, it can also lead to more fashion precision. We won’t be able to use a power school for a design that has been restore with a higher precision.

    With this in mind, I’m developing CSS with a focus on the default values much more these days. Since there’s no specific order, and no chains of specific values to keep track of, this frees me to develop breakpoints simultaneously. I concentrate on finding common styles and isolating the specific exceptions in closed media query ranges (that is, any range with a max-width set). 

    As you can view each target as a clean slate, this strategy opens up some opportunities. If a product’s layout appears to be based on Flexbox at all breakpoints, that is acceptable and can be coded in the definition style sheet. But if it looks like Grid would be much better for large windows and Flexbox for portable, these can both be done entirely freely when the CSS is put into finished media keyword ranges. Additionally, having a thorough understanding of any given component in all breakpoints upfront is necessary for developing simultaneously. This can help identify issues with the design more quickly in the development process. We don’t want to get stuck down a rabbit hole building a complex component for mobile, and then get the designs for desktop and find they are equally complex and incompatible with the HTML we created for the mobile view!

    I encourage you to try this method, even though it won’t work for everyone. Responsively App, Blisk, and many others are among the many tools available to assist with concurrent development.

    Having said that, I don’t feel the order itself is particularly relevant. Stick to the classic development order if you like to concentrate on the mobile view, understand the requirements for other breakpoints, and prefer to work on multiple devices at once. It’s crucial to find common styles and exceptions in the appropriate stylesheet, which is a manual tree-shaking procedure! Personally, I find this a little easier when working on a component across breakpoints, but that’s by no means a requirement.

    Closed media query ranges are used in real life.

    We overwrite the styles in the traditional mobile-first CSS, but media query ranges can be used to prevent this. To illustrate the difference ( I’m using SCSS for brevity ), let’s assume there are three visual designs:

    • smaller than 768
    • from 768 to less than 1024
    • 1024 and anything larger

    Take a simple example where a block-level element has a default padding of “20px,” which is overwritten at tablet to be “40px” and set back to “20px” on desktop.

    Classic min-width mobile-first

    .my-block { padding: 20px; @media (min-width: 768px) { padding: 40px; } @media (min-width: 1024px) { padding: 20px; }}

    Closed media query range

    .my-block { padding: 20px; @media (min-width: 768px) and (max-width: 1023.98px) { padding: 40px; }}

    The subtle difference is that the mobile-first example sets the default padding to “20px” and then overwrites it at each breakpoint, setting it three times in total. In contrast, the second example sets the default padding to “20px” and only overrides it at the relevant breakpoint where it isn’t the default value (in this instance, tablet is the exception).

    The goal is to: 

    • Only set styles when needed. 
    • Not set them with the expectation of overwriting them later on, again and again. 

    To this end, closed media query ranges are our best friend. If we need to make a change to any given view, we make it in the CSS media query range that applies to the specific breakpoint. We’ll be much less likely to introduce unwanted alterations, and our regression testing only needs to focus on the breakpoint we have actually edited. 

    Taking the above example, if we find that .my-block spacing on desktop is already accounted for by the margin at that breakpoint, and since we want to remove the padding altogether, we could do this by setting the mobile padding in a closed media query range.

    .my-block {  @media (max-width: 767.98px) {    padding: 20px;  }  @media (min-width: 768px) and (max-width: 1023.98px) {    padding: 40px;  }}

    The browser default padding for our block is “0,” so instead of adding a desktop media query and using unset or “0” for the padding value (which we would need with mobile-first), we can wrap the mobile padding in a closed media query (since it is now also an exception) so it won’t get picked up at wider breakpoints. At the desktop breakpoint, we won’t need to set any padding style, as we want the browser default value.

    Bundling versus separating the CSS

    Due to the browser's concurrent request limit (typically around six ), it was crucial back then to keep the number of requests to a minimum. In consequence, using image sprites and CSS bundling was the norm, with all the CSS being downloaded as a single stylesheet with the highest priority.

    With HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 now on the scene, the number of requests is no longer the big deal it used to be. This enables us to use a media query to break CSS into multiple files. The obvious benefit of this is that the browser can now request the CSS it currently requires with a higher priority than the CSS it doesn't. This is more performant and can reduce the overall time page rendering is blocked.

    What version of HTTP do you use?

    Go to your website and open the dev tools in your browser to find out which version of HTTP you're using. Next, select the Network tab and make sure the Protocol column is visible. If "h2" is included in the protocol list, that indicates that HTTP/2 is being used.

    Note: To check the Protocol column in your browser's dev tools, right-click any column header ( such as Name ), go to the Network tab, reload your page, and then check the Protocol column.

    Also, if your website is still using HTTP/1... WHY?! What are you waiting for? Excellent user support exists for HTTP/2.

    CSS is split in half.

    Separating the CSS into individual files is a worthwhile task. Linking the separate CSS files using the relevant media attribute allows the browser to identify which files are needed immediately (because they’re render-blocking) and which can be deferred. Based on this, it allocates each file an appropriate priority.

    In the following example of a website visited on a mobile breakpoint, we can see the mobile and default CSS are loaded with" Highest" priority, as they are currently needed to render the page. The last three CSS files ( print, tablet, and desktop ) are still being downloaded in case they need to be later, but with" Lowest" priority.

    Before rendering can begin, the browser will need to download and parse the CSS file when using bundled CSS.

    While, as noted, with the CSS separated into different files linked and marked up with the relevant media attribute, the browser can prioritize the files it currently needs. Using closed media query ranges allows the browser to do this at all widths, as opposed to classic mobile-first min-width queries, where the desktop browser would have to download all the CSS with Highest priority. We can’t assume that desktop users always have a fast connection. For instance, in many rural areas, internet connection speeds are still slow. 

    Depending on project requirements, the media queries and the number of separate CSS files will vary from project to project, but the example below might look similar.

    bundled CSS



    This single file contains all the CSS, including all media queries, and it will be downloaded with Highest priority.

    Separated CSS



    Separating the CSS and specifying a media attribute value on each link tag allows the browser to prioritize what it currently needs. Out of the five files listed above, two will be downloaded with Highest priority: the default file, and the file that matches the current media query. The others will be downloaded with Lowest priority.

    Depending on the project’s deployment strategy, a change to one file (mobile.css, for example) would only require the QA team to regression test on devices in that specific media query range. Compare that to the prospect of deploying the single bundled site.css file, an approach that would normally trigger a full regression test.

    Moving on

    The adoption of mobile-first CSS was a significant development milestone because it allowed front-end developers to concentrate on mobile web applications rather than creating websites for desktop use and attempting to retrofit them to work on other devices.

    I don't think anyone wants to return to that development model again, but it's important we don't lose sight of the issue it highlighted: that things can easily get convoluted and less efficient if we prioritize one particular device—any device—over others. For this reason, it seems natural to concentrate on the CSS in its own right, keeping an eye on both the default setting and the exceptions. I've started to notice subtle simplifications in both the CSS of my own and that of other developers, and that testing and maintenance work is also a little more effective and streamlined.

    In general, simplifying CSS rule creation whenever we can is ultimately a cleaner approach than going around in circles of overrides. However, whatever method you use, it must fit the project. Mobile-first may turn out to be the best option for the situation at hand, but first you need to fully comprehend the trade-offs you're entering.

  • Personalization Pyramid: A Framework for Designing with User Data

    Personalization Pyramid: A Framework for Designing with User Data

    In today’s data-driven environment, it’s becoming more common for a UX expert to be asked to create a personal digital experience, whether it be a common website, consumer portal, or native application. However while there continues to be no lack of marketing buzz around personalization systems, we also have very few defined approaches for implementing personalized UX.

    We enter that place. After completing tens of personalisation projects over the past few years, we gave ourselves a purpose: could you make a systematic personalization platform especially for UX practitioners? A human-centered personalization program can be established using the Personalization Pyramid, which covers data, classification, content delivery, and overall objectives. By using this strategy, you will be able to understand the core elements of a modern, UX-driven personalization system ( or at the very least know enough to get started ).

    Getting Started

    We’ll assume that you are already comfortable with the fundamentals of modern personalization for the purposes of this article. A nice guide can be found these: Website Personalization Planning. Although Graphic projects in this field can take a variety of forms, they frequently start from the same place.

    Common scenarios for starting a customisation task:

    • Your business or client made a purchase to support personalization with a content management system ( CMS ), marketing automation platform ( MAP ), or other related technology.
    • The CMO, CDO, or CIO has identified personalisation as a target
    • User data is unclear or disjointed.
    • You are running some secluded targeting strategies or A/B tests
    • On the personalisation method, stakeholders disagree.
    • Mandate of customer privacy rules ( e. g. GDPR ) requires revisiting existing user targeting practices

    Regardless of where you begin, a powerful personalization system will require the same key creating stones. These are the “levels” on the tower, as we’ve made them. Whether you are a UX artist, scholar, or planner, understanding the core components may help make your contribution effective.

    From top to bottom, the rates include:

      North Star: What larger corporate goal is driving the personalization system?
    1. Objectives: What are the specific, tangible benefits of the system?
    2. Touchpoints: Where will you get personal service?
    3. Contexts and Campaigns: What personalization information does the person view?
    4. What constitutes a distinct, accessible market according to consumer parts?
    5. Actionable information: What dependable and credible information is captured by our professional platform to generate personalization?
    6. What more extensive set of data is conceivable ( as of right now in our environment ) for personalization?

    We’ll go through each of these amounts in turn. An associated deck of cards was created to highlight specific examples from each level to make this more practical. We’ve found them helpful in customisation brainstorming periods, and will include cases for you here.

    Starting at the Top

    The tower has the following elements:

    North Star

    With your personalisation plan, whether large or small, you aim for a general north star. The North Star defines the (one ) overall mission of the personalization program. What do you hope to accomplish? North Stars cast a ghost. The darkness is bigger the sun, the star, and so on. Example of North Starts may contain:

      Function: Use simple user inputs to optimize. Examples:” Raw” messages, basic search effects, system user settings and settings options, general flexibility, basic improvements
    1. Self-contained personalisation component is a feature. Examples:” Cooked” notifications, advanced optimizations ( geolocation ), basic dynamic messaging, customized modules, automations, recommenders
    2. Experience: Individualized person experiences across a range of consumer flows and interactions. Examples: Email campaigns, landing pages, advanced messaging ( i. e. C2C chat ) or conversational interfaces, larger user flows and content-intensive optimizations ( localization ).
    3. Solution: Highly distinctive, personalized solution experiences. Example: Standalone, branded experience with personalization at their base, like the “algotorial” songs by Spotify quite as Discover Weekly.

    Goals

    Personalization can help speed up designing with customer intentions, as in any good UX design. Goals are the tactical and measurable metrics that will prove the overall program is successful. A good place to begin is with your current analytics and measurement program and metrics you can benchmark against. In some cases, new goals may be appropriate. The most important thing to keep in mind is that personalization is not a desired outcome. It is a means to an end. Common goals include:

    • Conversion
    • Time spent on task
    • Net promoter score ( NPS)
    • satisfaction of the client

    Touchpoints

    Touchpoints are where the personalization happens. This will be one of your biggest areas of responsibility as a UX designer. The touchpoints available to you will depend on how your personalization and associated technology capabilities are instrumented, and should be rooted in improving a user’s experience at a particular point in the journey. Touchpoints can be multi-device ( mobile, in-store, website ), but they can also be more specific ( web banner, web pop-up, etc. ). Here are a few illustrations:

    Channel-level Points

    • Email: Role
    • Email: When is the email open?
    • In-store display ( JSON endpoint )
    • Native app
    • Search

    Wireframe-level Touchpoints

    • Web overlay
    • Web alert bar
    • Web banner
    • Web content block
    • Menu on the web

    If you’re designing for web interfaces, for example, you will likely need to include personalized “zones” in your wireframes. Based on our next step, contexts, and campaigns, the content for these can be presented programmatically in touchpoints.

    Contexts and Campaigns

    Once you’ve identified some touchpoints, you can decide what kind of personalized content a user will receive. Many personalization tools will refer to these as” campaigns” ( so, for example, a campaign on a web banner for new visitors to the website ). These will be displayed programmatically to specific user segments, as defined by user data. At this stage, we find it helpful to consider two separate models: a context model and a content model. The context helps you consider the level of user engagement at the personalization moment, for instance, if they are just casually browsing information rather than engaging in a deep dive. Think of it in terms of information retrieval behaviors. The content model can then guide you in deciding what kind of personalization to use in the context ( for instance, an” Enrich” campaign that features related articles might be a good substitute for extant content ).

    Personalization Context Model:

    1. Browse
    2. Skim
    3. Nudge
    4. Feast

    Content model for personalization:

    1. Alert
    2. Make Easier
    3. Cross-Sell
    4. Enrich

    We’ve written a lot about each of these models elsewhere, so if you’d like to read more, check out Colin’s Personalization Content Model and Jeff’s Personalization Context Model.

    User Groups

    User segments can be created prescriptively or adaptively, based on user research ( e. g. via rules and logic tied to set user behaviors or via A/B testing ). You will need to think about how to treat the logged-in visitor, the guest or returning visitor for whom you may have a stateful cookie ( or another post-cookie identifier ), or the authenticated visitor who is logged in at the very least. Here are some examples from the personalization pyramid:

    • Unknown
    • Guest
    • Authenticated
    • Default
    • Referred
    • Role
    • Cohort
    • Unique Identification Number

    Actionable information

    Every organization with any digital presence has data. It’s important to inquire about how to use the data you can ethically collect on users, its inherent reliability and value, and what is the term for “data activation.” Fortunately, the tide is turning to first-party data: a recent study by Twilio estimates some 80 % of businesses are using at least some type of first-party data to personalize the customer experience.

    First-party data has a number of benefits on the user experience front, including being relatively simple to collect, more likely to be accurate, and less susceptible to the” creep factor” of third-party data. So a key part of your UX strategy should be to determine what the best form of data collection is on your audiences. Here are a few illustrations:

    There is a progression of profiling when it comes to recognizing and making decisioning about different audiences and their signals. As time and confidence and data volume increase, it varies to more granular constructs about smaller and smaller cohorts of users.

    While some combination of implicit / explicit data is generally a prerequisite for any implementation ( more commonly referred to as first party and third-party data ) ML efforts are typically not cost-effective directly out of the box. This is because optimization requires a strong data backbone and content repository. But these approaches should be considered as part of the larger roadmap and may indeed help accelerate the organization’s overall progress. At this point, you will typically work with important stakeholders and product owners to create a profiling model. The profiling model includes defining approach to configuring profiles, profile keys, profile cards and pattern cards. a scalable, multi-faceted approach to profiling.

    Pulling it Together

    The cards serve as the foundation for an inventory of sorts ( we provide blanks for you to tailor your own ), a set of potential levers and motivations for the kind of personalization activities you aspire to deliver, but they are more valuable when grouped together.

    In assembling a card “hand”, one can begin to trace the entire trajectory from leadership focus down through a strategic and tactical execution. It serves as the foundation for the workshops that both co-authors have conducted to build a program backlog, which would make a good article topic.

    In the meantime, what is important to note is that each colored class of card is helpful to survey in understanding the range of choices potentially at your disposal, it is threading through and making concrete decisions about for whom this decisioning will be made: where, when, and how.

    Lay Down Your Cards

    Near, medium, and long-term goals must be taken into account in any sustainable personalization strategy. Even with the leading CMS platforms like Sitecore and Adobe or the most exciting composable CMS DXP out there, there is simply no “easy button” wherein a personalization program can be stood up and immediately view meaningful results. Having said that, every personalization activity has a common grammar, just like every sentence has nouns and verbs. These cards attempt to map that territory.

  • Humility: An Essential Value

    Humility: An Essential Value

    Humility, a writer’s most important quality, has a great circle to it. What about sincerity, an business manager’s important value? Or a doctor’s? Or a student’s? They all have excellent sounding voices. When humility is our guiding light, the course is usually available for fulfillment, development, relation, and commitment. We’re going to discuss why in this book.

    That said, this is a guide for developers, and to that conclusion, I’d like to begin with a story—well, a voyage, actually. Along the way, I’m going to render myself a little vulnerable. I call it:

    The Ludicrous Pate of Justin: A Tale of its Author

    When I was coming out of arts school, a long-haired, goateed novice, write was a known quantity to me, design on the web, however, was riddled with complexities to understand and learn, a problem to be solved. Although I had formal training in typography, layout, and creative design, how could these fundamental skills be applied to a developing electric landscape was what piqued my interest. This style would eventually form the rest of my profession.

    But I drained HTML and JavaScript novels into the wee hours of the morning and self-taught myself how to code during my freshman year rather than student and go into print like many of my companions. I wanted—nay, needed—to better understand the underlying relevance of what my design decisions may think when rendered in a website.

    The so-called” Wild West” of website layout existed in the late 1990s and the early 2000s. Manufacturers at the time were all figuring out how to use layout and visual connection to the online environment. What were the guidelines? How may we break them and also engage, entertain, and present information? How was my values, which include sincerity, respect, and connection, coincide with that on a more general level? I was eager to find out.

    Those are amazing factors between non-career relationships and the world of design, even though I’m referring to a different era. What are your main passions, or ideals, that elevate medium? The main themes are the same, basically the same as what we previously discussed on the immediate parallels between what fulfills you, independent of the physical or digital realms.

    First within tables, animated GIFs, Flash, then with Web Standards, divs, and CSS, there was personality, raw unbridled creativity, and unique means of presentment that often defied any semblance of a visible grid. Splash screens and “browser requirement” pages aplenty. Usability and accessibility were typically victims of such a creation, but such paramount facets of any digital design were largely (and, in hindsight, unfairly) disregarded at the expense of experimentation.

    For instance, this iteration of my personal portfolio site (” the pseudoroom” ) from that time was experimental if not a little overt in terms of the visual presentation of the idea of a living sketchbook. Quite skeuomorphic. On this one, I worked with fellow artist and dear buddy Marc Clancy, who is now a co-founder of the creative task organizing app Milanote, to outline and then play with various user interactions. Finally, I’d break it down and script it into a modern layout.

    Along with pattern book pieces, the site even offered free downloads for Mac OS customizations: pc wallpapers that were successfully design experimentation, custom-designed typefaces, and desktop icons.

    GUI Galaxy was a design, pixel art, and Mac-centric news portal that my friends and I conceptualized, designed, developed, and deployed around the same time.

    Design news portals were incredibly popular at the time, and they now accept tweet-sized, small-format excerpts from relevant news from the categories I previously covered. If you took Twitter, curated it to a few categories, and wrapped it in a custom-branded experience, you’d have a design news portal from the late 90s / early 2000s.

    We as designers had changed and developed a bandwidth-sensitive, award-winning, much more accessibility-conscious website. Still ripe with experimentation, yet more mindful of equitable engagement. There are a few content panes here, with both Mac-focused news and general news (tech, design ) to be seen. We also offered many of the custom downloads I cited before as present on my folio site but branded and themed to GUI Galaxy.

    The presentation layer consists of international design, illustration, and news author collaboration, and the backbone of the website was a homegrown CMS. And the collaboration effort here, in addition to experimentation on a’ brand’ and content delivery, was hitting my core. We were creating a global audience by creating something bigger than just one of us.

    Collaboration and connection transcend medium in their impact, immensely fulfilling me as a designer.

    Why am I going down this design memory lane with you, now? Two reasons.

    First, there’s a reason for the nostalgia for that design era ( the” Wild West” era, as I put it ): the inherent exploration, personality, and creativity that dominated many design portals and personal portfolio websites. Ultra-finely detailed pixel art UI, custom illustration, bespoke vector graphics, all underpinned by a strong design community.

    The web design industry has experienced a period of stagnation in recent years. I suspect there’s a strong chance you’ve seen a site whose structure looks something like this: a hero image / banner with text overlaid, perhaps with a lovely rotating carousel of images ( laying the snark on heavy there ), a call to action, and three columns of sub-content directly beneath. Perhaps there are selections that vaguely relate to their respective content in an icon library.

    Design, as it’s applied to the digital landscape, is in dire need of thoughtful layout, typography, and visual engagement that goes hand-in-hand with all the modern considerations we now know are paramount: usability. accessibility. Load times and bandwidth- sensitive content delivery. A user-friendly presentation that connects with people wherever they are. We must be mindful of, and respectful toward, those concerns—but not at the expense of creativity of visual communication or via replicating cookie-cutter layouts.

    Pixel Issues

    Websites during this period were often designed and built on Macs whose OS and desktops looked something like this. Although Mac OS 7.5 is available, 8 and 9 are not very different.

    How could any single icon, at any point, stand out and grab my attention, fascinated me? In this example, the user’s desktop is tidy, but think of a more realistic example with icon pandemonium. Or, let’s say an icon was a part of a larger system group ( fonts, extensions, control panels ): how did it maintain cohesion within the group as well?

    These were 32 x 32 pixel creations, utilizing a 256-color palette, designed pixel-by-pixel as mini mosaics. Under such absurd constraints, this seemed to me to be the embodiment of digital visual communication. And often, ridiculous restrictions can yield the purification of concept and theme.

    So I started doing my homework and conducting my research. I was a student of this new medium, hungry to dissect, process, discover, and make it my own.

    I wanted to see how I could use that 256-color palette to push the boundaries of a 32×32 pixel grid, expanding upon the idea of exploration. Those ridiculous constraints forced a clarity of concept and presentation that I found incredibly appealing. I was thrown the digital gauntlet, and that challenge fueled my determination. And so, in my dorm room into the wee hours of the morning, I toiled away, bringing conceptual sketches into mini mosaic fruition.

    These are some of my creations that I made using ResEdit, the only program I had at the time, to create icons. ResEdit was a clunky, built-in Mac OS utility not really made for exactly what we were using it for. Research is at the center of all of this endeavor. Challenge. Problem-solving Again, these core connection-based values are agnostic of medium.

    There’s one more design portal I want to talk about, which also serves as the second reason for my story to bring this all together.

    Kaliber 1000 is short for K10k. K10k was founded in 1998 by Michael Schmidt and Toke Nygaard, and was the design news portal on the web during this period. With its pixel art-fueled presentation, attention to detail paid to every aspect of every detail, and many of the more well-known designers of the time who were invited to be news authors on the site, well… it was the place to be, my friend. With respect where respect is due, GUI Galaxy’s concept was inspired by what these folks were doing.

    For my part, the combination of my web design work and pixel art exploration began to get me some notoriety in the design scene. K10k eventually figured out and added me as one of their very limited group of news writers to add content to the website.

    Amongst my personal work and side projects —and now with this inclusion—in the design community, this put me on the map. Additionally, my design work has started to appear on other design news portals, as well as in publications abroad and domestically. With that degree of success while in my early twenties, something else happened:

    I really changed into a colossal asshole in just about a year of school, not less. The press and the praise became what fulfilled me, and they went straight to my head. My ego was inflated by them. I actually felt somewhat superior to my fellow designers.

    The victims? My design stagnated. Its evolution, which is what I evolved, has stagnated.

    I felt so supremely confident in my abilities that I effectively stopped researching and discovering. When I used to lead sketch concepts or iterations as my first instinctive step, I instead leaped right into Photoshop. I drew my inspiration from the smallest of sources ( and with blinders on ). My peers frequently vehemently disapproved of any criticism of my work. The most tragic loss: I had lost touch with my values.

    Some of my friendships and blossoming professional relationships almost ended up being destroyed by my ego. I was toxic in talking about design and in collaboration. However, thankfully, those same friends gave me a priceless gift: sincerity. They called me out on my unhealthy behavior.

    Although it was something I initially rejected, I eventually had a chance to reflect on it in depth. I was soon able to accept, and process, and course correct. Although the realization made me feel uneasy, the re-awakening was necessary. I let go of the “reward” of adulation and re-centered upon what stoked the fire for me in art school. Most importantly, I regained my fundamental values.

    Always Students

    Following that temporary decline, my personal and professional design journey advanced. And I could self-reflect as I got older to facilitate further growth and course correction as needed.

    Let’s take the Large Hadron Collider as an example. The LHC was designed” to help answer some of the fundamental open questions in physics, which concern the basic laws governing the interactions and forces among the elementary objects, the deep structure of space and time, and in particular the interrelation between quantum mechanics and general relativity”. Thank you, Wikipedia.

    Around fifteen years ago, in one of my earlier professional roles, I designed the interface for the application that generated the LHC’s particle collision diagrams. These diagrams are the depiction of what is actually happening inside the Collider during any given particle collision event and are frequently regarded as works of art by themselves.

    Designing the interface for this application was a fascinating process for me, in that I worked with Fermilab physicists to understand what the application was trying to achieve, but also how the physicists themselves would be using it. In order to accomplish this, this role requires,

    I cut my teeth on usability testing, working with the Fermilab team to iterate and improve the interface. To me, their language and the topics they discussed seemed foreign. And by making myself humble and working under the mindset that I was but a student, I made myself available to be a part of their world to generate that vital connection.

    I also had my first ethnographic observational experience, where I observed how the physicists used the tool in their own environments, on their own terminals. For example, one takeaway was that due to the level of ambient light-driven contrast within the facility, the data columns ended up using white text on a dark gray background instead of black text-on-white. They were able to focus on their eyes while working during the day while poring over enormous amounts of data. And Fermilab and CERN are government entities with rigorous accessibility standards, so my knowledge in that realm also grew. Another crucial form of connection was the barrier-free design.

    So to those core drivers of my visual problem-solving soul and ultimate fulfillment: discovery, exposure to new media, observation, human connection, and evolution. Before I entered those values, I had to check my ego before entering it, which opened the door to those values.

    An evergreen willingness to listen, learn, understand, grow, evolve, and connect yields our best work. I want to pay attention to the words “grow” and “evolve” in particular in that statement. If we are always students of our craft, we are also continually making ourselves available to evolve. Yes, we have completed years of design research. Or the focused lab sessions from a UX bootcamp. Or the monogrammed portfolio of our creative work. Or, ultimately, decades of a career behind us.

    However, with all that being said, “experience” does not equate to “expert.”

    As soon as we close our minds via an inner monologue of’ knowing it all’ or branding ourselves a” #thoughtleader” on social media, the designer we are is our final form. The creator who we can be will never be there.

  • I am a creative.

    I am a creative.

    I am imaginative. Alchemy is what I do. It is a puzzle. Instead of letting it get done by me, I do it.

    I have a creative side. No all creative people approve of this brand. No everyone see themselves in this manner. Some innovative people practice scientific in their work. I value their assertion, which is true. Perhaps I have a little bit of fear for them. However, my staying and approach are different.

    It distracts one to apologize and qualify in progress. That’s what my head does to destroy me. I’ll leave it alone for today. I may come back later to make amends and define. After I’ve said what I originally said. which is difficult enough.

    Except when it is simple and flows like a wine valley.

    Sometimes it does. Maybe what I need to make arrives right away. I’ve learned to avoid saying it right away because people think you don’t work hard enough when you know it’s the best idea when you’re on the go and you know it’s the best idea.

    Sometimes I just keep working until the plan strikes me. It occasionally arrives right away, but I don’t remind people for three weeks. Sometimes I get so excited about an idea that just came along that I blurt it out and didn’t stop myself. like a child who discovered a prize in one of his Cracker Jacks. Maybe I get away with this. Yes, that is the best plan, per some observers. The majority of the time, they don’t, and I regret that joy has faded.

    Joy should be saved for the meeting, where it will matter. not the informal gathering that two different gatherings precede that meeting. Nobody understands why these conferences occur. We keep saying we’re getting rid of them, but we keep discovering new ways to get them. They occasionally yet excel. But occasionally they detract from the actual labor. Depending on what you do and where you do it, the ratio between when conferences are valuable and when they are a sad distraction vary. also who you are and what you do. I’ll go over it once more. I am imaginative. That is the style.

    Sometimes, despite many hours of diligent effort, someone is hardly useful. Maybe I have to accept that and move on to the next task.

    Don’t inquire about the procedure. I am imaginative.

    I have a creative side. I have no control over my desires. And I have no control over my best tips.

    I can nail ahead, fill in the blanks, or use images or information, which occasionally works. I can go for a move, which occasionally works. There is a Eureka that has nothing to do with sizzling fuel and flowing pots. I may be making dinner. I frequently know what to do when I awaken. The idea that may have saved me disappears almost as frequently as I become aware and part of the world once more in a senseless wind of oblivion. For imagination, in my opinion, comes from that other planet. The one that we enter in ambitions and, possibly, before and after suicide. But authors should be asking this, and I am not a writer. I am imaginative. And it’s for philosophers to build massive soldiers in their imaginative world that they claim to be true. That is yet another tangent, though. And a sad one. Possibly on a much bigger issue than whether or not I am creative. But that’s not how I came around, though.

    Often, the outcome is evasion. And suffering. Do you know the designer who is tortured by the cliché? Even when the artist attempts to create a soft drink song, a callback in a worn-out sitcom, or a budget request, that noun is correct.

    Some individuals who detest being called artistic perhaps been closeted artists, but that’s between them and their gods. No offence intended. Your wisdom is also true. However, mine is for me.

    Creatives identify artists.

    Disadvantages are aware of cons, just like queers are aware of queers, just like real rappers are aware of actual rappers. Designers are highly revered by people in the world. We respect, follow, and nearly deify the excellent ones. Of course, it is dreadful to revere any person. We have been given warning. Better is what we are. We are aware that people are really people. They argue, they are depressed, they regret their most important choices, they are weak and hungry, they can be violent, and they can be as ridiculous as we can because they are clay, just like us. But. But. However, they produce this incredible point. They give birth to something that may not exist before them and couldn’t exist without. They are the inspirations ‘ parents. And I suppose I should add that they are the mother of technology because it’s just lying it. Ba ho bum! Okay, that’s all done. Continue.

    Because we compare our personal small accomplishments to those of the great ones, designers denigrate them. Wonderful video I‘m not Miyazaki, though. That is glory right now. That is brilliance straight out of the Bible. This unsatisfied small thing I created? It essentially fell off the back of the pumpkin trailer. And the carrots weren’t actually new.

    Designers is aware that they are at best Salieri. Also Mozart’s original artists believe that.

    I have a creative side. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 times, but my previous artistic managers are the ones who make my hallucinations. They are correct in doing so. My mind goes blank when it really counts because I’m too sluggish and complacent. No medication is available to treat artistic function.

    I have a creative side. Every project I create has a goal that makes Indiana Jones appear older and snoring in a balcony head. The more I pursue my creative endeavors, the faster I progress in my work, and the more I slog through loops and gaze blankly before beginning that task.

    I can move ten times more quickly than those who aren’t artistic, those who have only had a short-cut of creativity, and those who have just had a short-cut of creativity for work. Only that I spend twice as long putting the job off as they do before I work ten times as quickly as they do. When I put my mind to it, I am so confident in my ability to do a wonderful career. I have an addiction to the delay rush. The climb also terrifies me.

    I don’t create art.

    I have a creative side. hardly a performer. Though as a child, I had a dream that I would one day become that. Some of us criticize our abilities and like our own selves because we are not Michelangelos and Warhols. At least we aren’t in elections, which is narcissism.

    I have a creative side. Despite my belief in reason and science, I make decisions based on my own senses and instincts. and sit in the aftermath of both the triumphs and disasters.

    I have a creative side. Another artists, who see things differently, will find every syllable I’ve said irritate me. Ask two artists a problem and find three opinions. No matter how we perhaps think about it, our debate, our passion for it, and our responsibility to our own truth, at least in my opinion, are the best indications that we are artists.

    I have a creative side. I lament my lack of taste in almost all of the areas of human understanding that I know very little about. And I put my ego before everything else in the areas that are most important to me, or perhaps more precisely, to my passions. Without my addictions, I’d probably have to spend the majority of our time looking ourselves in the eye, which is something that almost none of us can do for very long. No seriously. Actually, no. Because a lot of career is intolerable if you really look at it.

    I have a creative side. I think that when I am gone, some of the good parts of me will stay in the head of at least one additional person, just like a family does.

    Working frees me from worrying about my job.

    I have a creative side. I worry that my little product will disappear unexpectedly.

    I have a creative side. I’m too busy making the next thing to devote too much time to it, especially since practically everything I create did achieve the level of success I conceive of.

    I have a creative side. I think there is the greatest secret in the process. I think I have to consider it so strongly that I actually made the foolish decision to publish an essay I wrote without having to go through or edit. I swear I didn’t do this frequently. But I did it right away because I was even more frightened of forgetting what I was saying because I was afraid of you seeing through my sad movements toward the beautiful.

    There. I believe I’ve said it.

  • Opportunities for AI in Accessibility

    Opportunities for AI in Accessibility

    I thoroughly enjoyed reading Joe Dolson’s most recent article on the crossroads of AI and mobility because of how skeptical he is of AI in general and how many people have been using it. In fact, I’m very skeptical of AI myself, despite my role at Microsoft as an accessibility technology strategist who helps manage the AI for Accessibility award program. As with any device, AI can be used in very positive, equitable, and visible ways, as well as in destructive, unique, and harmful ways. And there are a lot of uses for the poor center as well.

    I’d like you to consider this a “yes … and” piece to complement Joe’s post. I’m just trying to contradict what he’s saying, but I’m just trying to give some context to initiatives and opportunities where AI can make a difference for people with disability. I want to take some time to talk about what’s possible in hope that we’ll get there one day. I’m no saying that there aren’t real challenges or pressing problems with AI that need to be addressed; there are.

    Other words

    Joe’s article spends a lot of time examining how computer vision models can create other word. He raises a number of legitimate points about the state of affairs right now. And while computer-vision concepts continue to improve in the quality and complexity of information in their information, their benefits aren’t wonderful. He argues to be accurate that the state of image research is currently very poor, especially for some graphic types, in large part due to the absence of contextual contexts in which to look at images ( as a result of having separate “foundation” models for words analysis and image analysis ). Today’s models aren’t trained to distinguish between images that are contextually relevant ( which should probably have descriptions ) and those that are purely decorative ( which might not even need a description ) either. However, I still think there’s possible in this area.

    As Joe points out, alt text publishing via human-in-the-loop should be a given. And if AI can intervene and provide a starting point for alt text, even if the swift reads,” What is this BS?” That’s not correct at all … Let me try to offer a starting point— I think that’s a gain.

    If we can specifically teach a design to consider image usage in context, it might be able to help us more swiftly distinguish between images that are likely to be beautiful and those that are more descriptive. That will help clarify which situations require image descriptions, and it will increase authors ‘ effectiveness in making their sites more visible.

    While complex images—like graphs and charts—are challenging to describe in any sort of succinct way ( even for humans ), the image example shared in the GPT4 announcement points to an interesting opportunity as well. Let’s say you came across a map that was simply the name of the table and the type of visualization it was: Pie table comparing smartphone use to have phone use among US households making under$ 30, 000 annually. ( That would be a pretty bad alt text for a chart because it frequently leaves many unanswered questions about the data, but let’s just assume that was the description in place. ) If your website knew that that picture was a pie graph ( because an onboard model concluded this ), imagine a world where people could ask questions like these about the creative:

    • Do more people use smartphones or other types of smartphones?
    • How many more?
    • Is there a group of people that don’t fall into either of these buckets?
    • That number, how many?

    For a moment, the chance to learn more about images and data in this way could be revolutionary for people who are blind and low vision as well as for those with various forms of color blindness, cognitive disabilities, and other issues. Putting aside the realities of large language model ( LLM) hallucinations, where a model just makes up plausible-sounding “facts,” It could also be useful in educational contexts to help people who can see these charts, as is, to understand the data in the charts.

    What if you could ask your browser to make a complicated chart simpler? What if you demanded that the line graph be isolated into just one line? What if you could ask your browser to transpose the colors of the different lines to work better for form of color blindness you have? What if you demanded that it switch colors in favor of patterns? That seems like a possibility given the chat-based interfaces and our current ability to manipulate images in the AI tools of today.

    Now imagine a purpose-built model that could extract the information from that chart and convert it to another format. Perhaps it could convert that pie chart (or, better yet, a series of pie charts ) into more usable ( and useful ) formats, like spreadsheets, for instance. That would be incredible!

    Matching algorithms

    When Safiya Umoja Noble chose to call her book Algorithms of Oppression, she hit the nail on the head. Although her book focused on how search engines can foster racism, I believe it’s equally true that all computer models have the potential to foster conflict, prejudice, and intolerance. Whether it’s Twitter always showing you the latest tweet from a bored billionaire, YouTube sending us into a Q-hole, or Instagram warping our ideas of what natural bodies look like, we know that poorly authored and maintained algorithms are incredibly harmful. Many of these are the result of a lack of diversity in the people who create and build them. There is still a lot of potential for algorithm development when these platforms are built with inclusive features in mind.

    Take Mentra, for example. They serve as a network of people with disabilities. They employ an algorithm to match job seekers with potential employers based on more than 75 data points. On the job-seeker side of things, it considers each candidate’s strengths, their necessary and preferred workplace accommodations, environmental sensitivities, and so on. On the employer side, it takes into account each work environment, communication strategies for each job, and other factors. Mentra made the decision to change the script when it came to typical employment websites because it was run by neurodivergent people. They use their algorithm to propose available candidates to companies, who can then connect with job seekers that they are interested in, reducing the emotional and physical labor on the job-seeker side of things.

    When more people with disabilities are involved in developing algorithms, this can lower the likelihood that these algorithms will harm their communities. Diverse teams are crucial because of this.

    Imagine that a social media company’s recommendation engine was tuned to analyze who you’re following and if it was tuned to prioritize follow recommendations for people who talked about similar things but who were different in some key ways from your existing sphere of influence. For instance, if you were to follow a group of non-disabled white male academics who talk about AI, it might be advisable to follow those who are disabled, aren’t white, or aren’t men who also talk about AI. If you followed its recommendations, you might learn more about what’s happening in the AI field. These same systems should also use their understanding of biases about particular communities—including, for instance, the disability community—to make sure that they aren’t recommending any of their users follow accounts that perpetuate biases against (or, worse, spewing hate toward ) those groups.

    Other ways that AI can assist people with disabilities

    I’m sure I could go on and on about using AI to assist people with disabilities, but I’m going to make this last section into a bit of a lightning round if I weren’t trying to put this together in between other tasks. In no particular order:

      Voice preservation You may be aware of the voice-prescribing options from Microsoft, Acapela, or others, or you may have seen the announcement for VALL-E or Apple’s Global Accessibility Awareness Day. It’s possible to train an AI model to replicate your voice, which can be a tremendous boon for people who have ALS ( Lou Gehrig’s disease ) or motor-neuron disease or other medical conditions that can lead to an inability to talk. We need to approach this tech responsibly because it has the potential to have a truly transformative impact, which is why it can also be used to create audio deepfakes.
    • Voice recognition. Researchers like those in the Speech Accessibility Project are paying people with disabilities for their help in collecting recordings of people with atypical speech. As I type, they are actively recruiting people with Parkinson’s and related conditions, and they intend to expand this to other conditions as the project develops. More people with disabilities will be able to use voice assistants, dictation software, and voice-response services as a result of this research, which will result in more inclusive data sets that will enable them to use their computers and other devices more easily and with just their voices.
    • Text transformation. The most recent generation of LLMs is quite capable of changing existing text without giving off hallucinations. This is incredibly empowering for those who have cognitive disabilities and who may benefit from text summaries or simplified versions, or even text that has been prepared for bionic reading.

    The importance of diverse teams and data

    We must acknowledge the importance of our differences. The intersections of the identities we exist in have an impact on our lived experiences. These lived experiences—with all their complexities ( and joys and pain ) —are valuable inputs to the software, services, and societies that we shape. The data we use to train new models must be based on our differences, and those who provide it to us need to be compensated for doing so. More robust models are produced by inclusive data sets, which promote more justifiable outcomes.

    Want a model that doesn’t demean or patronize or objectify people with disabilities? Make sure that you include information about disabilities that is written by people who have a range of disabilities and that is well represented in the training data.

    Want a model that uses ableist language without using it? You may be able to use existing data sets to build a filter that can intercept and remediate ableist language before it reaches readers. Despite this, AI models won’t soon replace human copy editors when it comes to sensitivity reading.

    Want a copilot for coding that provides recomprehensible recommendations after the jump? Train it on code that you know to be accessible.


    I have no doubts about how dangerous AI can and will be for people today, tomorrow, and for the rest of the world. However, I think we should also acknowledge this and make thoughtful, thoughtful, and intentional changes to our approaches to AI that will also reduce harm over time with an emphasis on accessibility ( and, in general, inclusion ). Today, tomorrow, and well into the future.


    Many thanks to Kartik Sawhney for supporting the development of this article, Ashley Bischoff for providing me with invaluable editorial support, and, of course, Joe Dolson for the prompt.