Blog

  • 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? Although you are aware that better understanding of consumer needs may aid in the team becoming more specific about what they are trying to accomplish, research is needed quickly and affordably. 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 key. To encourage stakeholders to determine high-risk assumptions and buried complexity, you must work with them to mobilize them as much as you do to obtain answers 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 interactions between those things?

    A cross between panel 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. What’s ORCA, then? 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 philosophy is based on object-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 approach has four incremental shells and a staggering fifteen steps. In each round we get more precision on our System, Rupees, Computer, and As.

    I occasionally refer to ORCA as a “garbage in, garbage out” procedure. To ensure that the observable design produced in the last round truly tests properly, the procedure needs to be fed by good research. However, the beginning of the ORCA approach serves another purpose: it helps you buy the need for research if you don’t have a ton of study.

    In other words, the ORCA process serves as a gauntlet between research and design. You can gracefully ride a 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 you have doctors on your staff. 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 bothers them the most? How do they use the current app”? Here’s the issue with that, though. 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 conversation is more similar to what 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 scope for this redesign”?

    ” 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 contentious issues 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 interactions 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, search for nouns that are specific to your project’s business or industry and from at least a few sources. I call this noun foraging.

    Just a few excellent noun foraging sources can be found:

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

    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, for instance, a library app. 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 instances of this potential “book” object? Can you name a few? Check! The Alchemist, Ready Player One, Everybody Poops, OK!

    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!

    Concentrate on capturing the nouns with SIP as you go 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. These things, or objects, are what we are trying to identify.

    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 is 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! Rejoice back to 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 groups
    • 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 a client or automation 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

    You could start your workshop by doing noun foraging; this 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. Your friend here is affinity mapping!

    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. You don’t need to tell them you‘re looking for gaps in the team’s understanding so that you can demonstrate the need for more user research; that will be our little secret. 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 start.

    1. What is this thing?

    Want to have 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 there are any (you will ) definitions. This is gold for exposing misalignment and starting great conversations.

    As your discussion unfolds, capture any agreed-upon definitions. And when uncertainty strikes, ostensibly start an “open questions” parking lot. � �

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

    2. Do our users know what these things are? What is the name of this object?

    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. Do these two things exist the same? 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! Absolutely.

    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.

    Your expanding glossary of objects should continue to grow. 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: Are saved responses and templates in any way connected 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? Does that occur when the user is creating the saved response? Or when they apply the saved response to an email? How does that actually operate?

    Listen. Capture uncertainty. When the number of “open questions” reaches a critical mass, pause to 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 it easier for the team to concentrate 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 sort orders were displayed on the whiteboard.

    The CEO nodded his head and said,” This is why we haven’t been able to move forward in two years,” taking a step back.

    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 attempted to figure out what two things are different, but this time, we need to ask the team about every possible connection. For each object, ask how it relates to all the other objects. In what ways are the objects connected? Use your dependable boxes and arrows technique to make the connections all recognizable. 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 an attachment in a saved response be present?
    • 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 explosives strategically along the floodgates. 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.

    This is your moment of truth. 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, if you never design screens again without first addressing these 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.

    Before you begin building screens, I sincerely hope this will free up your time and money to spend on user education and clarifying what you are designing. 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.

    Good luck, everyone! Now go sell research!

  • Breaking Out of the Box

    Breaking Out of the Box

    CSS is all about styling containers. In fact, the whole website is made of containers, from the website viewport to components on a webpage. However, every now and then a new function 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, two screen or portable devices force us to reevaluate how to best make the most of the available space in a variety of different device positions.

    These latest changes to the online platform have made it both more challenging and fascinating to design items. They’re wonderful opportunities for us to break out of our triangular 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’re flexible, linkable, and stable, just like sites. 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 software may look like on desktop products in particular, and it can be challenging to get out of this psychological design.

    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.

    The Window Controls Overlay offers exactly this. 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 window and title bar 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 are the ones that allow it to minimize, maximize, or close its window.

    Window Controls Overlay removes the physical constraint of the title bar and window controls areas. The title bar and window control buttons are overlayed on top of the application’s web content, allowing for full height to be the app window.

    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. In fact, the web browser you are using uses the top area to display tabs.

    Spotify’s application window’s top edge is where the album artwork appears.

    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 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 reached 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.

    Here is how the app currently looks:

    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 a few ways to define 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 drag and click their way to a sizable area in the title bar, but when using the Window Controls Overlay feature, they are limited to where the control buttons are, and must carefully place their fingers in between these buttons to move the window.

    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. Let’s take a different approach, then. 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. The search field, logo, and button would need to be pushed down a little bit if the user made the window very narrow.

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

    Three intriguing things are provided by the API:

    • 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 on different operating systems, which is great because Mac and Windows have different title bar sizes. 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 use the above CSS code to move our header down and move the thumbnails down in accordance with this.

    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. To make it easier for us, web authors, to integrate more and more deeply with those devices, new features are added to the web platform. From watches or foldable devices to desktop computers, we need to evolve our design approach for the web. Nowadays, web building enables us to think outside the rectangular box.

    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!


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

  • Designers, (Re)define Success First

    Designers, (Re)define Success First

    I introduced the concept of normal social style about two and a half years earlier. 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 best.

    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 amazingly easy! However, we must first focus out to understand what we’re going through.

    Control the system

    Unfortunately, we’re confined to a capitalist system that encourages consumerism and inequality and is obsessed with the irrationality of infinite expansion. 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 years, 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 can 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 style, 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.
    • Instead of focusing on feedback loops like control power, employee reputation, or design-system investments, a company can improve its ability to achieve its goals. But that doesn’t alter the goals themselves, which means that the business will also work against your ethical-design ideals.
    • Most ethical-design efforts’ current focus is on the exchange of honest techniques, toolkits, articles, conferences, workshops, and other topics. This is also where social style has remained largely theoretical. We’ve been focusing on the wrong level of the system all this day.
    • Take, for instance, the regulations; they consistently outwit information. There can be commonly accepted guidelines, such as how fund works, or a sprint group’s concept of done. However, illegal laws meant to keep income, frequently revealed through comments like” the customer didn’t request for it” or “don’t make it too big” is also smother social style.
    • Changing the rules without holding official energy is extremely difficult. That’s why the next stage is so significant: self-organization. Bottom-up initiatives, interest projects, self-steering teams, and research 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 metrics are even more powerful than self-organization. Our businesses want to make more money, which means that everything and everyone in the business does their best to… make the company more income. And when I realized that profit is nothing more than a measurement, I understood how important a very particular, defined measurement may be toward pushing a company in a specific 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 go live. So a more realistic representation might look like this:

    The means are feasibility and desire, while viability is the objective. 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 unable to restore a healthy relationship with nature.

    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.

    pursue equity, sustainability, and well-being

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

    An objective on a personal level teaches us that success transcends the typical area of user experience and satisfaction, taking into account factors like how much time and effort are required of 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.

    A societal goal requires us to consider our impact beyond the mere user, widening our focus to the economy, communities, and other involuntary parties. 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 of maintaining harmony with humanity’s only home is the one we have. Referring to it simply as sustainability, our definition was:

    We create products and services that reward sufficiency and reusability. Our products are repurposed, given, and given priority to making sustainable choices in order to support the circular economy. 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, it is still necessary to define these goals. 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 provided 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 metrics for ( digital ) well-being to measure success, such as ( reduced ) screen time or software energy consumption?

    There’s another important message here. Even if we set an objective to create a calm interface, we might end up with a screen that makes you anxious if we were to pick 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 is very concise and focused.

    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. Making the decision to” simply” use your imagination and pick one of the many resources and knowledge resources 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 brief illustration suffice, or should you go with that enticing 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 affected by decisions are present when they are made? How can you measure our effects?

    The definition of success will fundamentally alter what it means to do good design.

    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.

    Kick it off or return to the pre-existing

    The kickoff is the most important meeting that can be so easy to forget to include. It consists of two main steps: 1 ) the alignment of expectations and 2 ) the definition of success.

    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 expressing expectations just as crucial as expressing expectations in terms of desire, viability, feasibility, and ethics. What are the objectives in each dimension?

    It is crucial to reach an understanding of what success means at this early stage because you can rely 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 and B’s diverse user group is essential to creating a successful product. So we do activity X and follow research process Y”. Compare those odds to a scenario where the team had to request 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. It consists of a set of outer rings and an inner ring, which are intended to capture ideas for measuring those objectives. 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 importance of including 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: What is the purpose of 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

    How do I get started with ethical design, many of my coworkers have questioned me over the past year? 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 is no skipping this step if you want to design in an ethical, responsible way.

    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 understand how your industry influences consumerism and inequality, how finance drives business, and how to think creatively about how to use the most powerful tools to 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 to set design goals for sustainability, well-being, and equity. Engage your stakeholders in a workshop and challenge them to think of ways to achieve and measure those ethical goals. Give them their opinions, clarify them, and demand their consent.

    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?” and” Wouldn’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.

    That’s not enough, as systems theory suggests, though. 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 when starting each design project, identify the appropriate metrics, and acknowledge that we already have everything in place. 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 design approach is excellent because it concentrates on what the consumer truly needs, is well-practiced, and has become a standard design practice 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 whether it is appropriate in light of the physical design and user interactions you’re creating. 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 creation, and why it’s been the de facto growth strategy for so long, make a lot of sense:

    Development order. A good development hierarchy is one thing you definitely get from mobile-first; you simply concentrate on the cellular view and start developing.

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

    prioritizes the smart see. The smart watch is the simplest and arguably the most significant because it covers all of the crucial user journeys and frequently accounts for more user visits ( depending on the project ) in terms of complexity.

    Stops desktop-centric growth. It can be tempting to first focus on the desktop perspective because desktop computers are used for growth. No one wants to spend their time retrofitting a desktop-centric website to function on mobile devices, but thinking about smart from the beginning prevents us from getting stuck in the future!

    Drawbacks of mobile-first

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

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

    higher CSS sensitivity Styles that have been returned to the default value in a class name charter then have a higher precision. 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 modifications to CSS at a lower watch ( 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.

    Home value issue is overruled by the issue.

    There is nothing intrinsically 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 need to replace styles to restore them to their defaults, which may cause issues after, especially if you’re using a combination of bespoke CSS and power classes, does this also lead to more style specificity. 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 technique opens up some opportunities. It’s acceptable and can be coded in the default style plate if a product’s layout appears to be based on Flexbox at all thresholds. 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, developing simultaneously requires you to have a thorough understanding of any given component in all breakpoints right away. 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. There are plenty of resources available to support concurrent development, including Responsively App, Blisk, and many others.

    Having said that, I don’t feel the order itself is particularly relevant. If you like to work on one device at a time, are comfortable with focusing on the mobile view, and are familiar with the requirements for other breakpoints, then you should definitely follow the classic development order. The key is to find common styles and exceptions so that you can include them 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. By using a media query, we can separate the CSS into several 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 for 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.

    If your website still uses HTTP/1, please check it out. WHHY!! What are you waiting for? Excellent user support exists for HTTP/2.

    splitting the CSS

    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. In case they are needed later, the remaining CSS files ( print, tablet, and desktop ) are still being downloaded with" Lowest" priority, though they are still needed.

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

    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.

    CSS that is separated



    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 milestone in web development 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 like the natural next step to concentrate on the CSS in its own right, always mindful of what is the default setting and what constitutes an exception. 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 be appropriate for the project. Mobile-first may turn out to be the best option for the situation at hand or not, 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 and more possible for you to be asked to create a personal electronic expertise, whether it’s a common website, consumer portal, or indigenous application. But while there continues to be no lack of marketing buzz around personalization systems, we also have very few defined approaches for implementing personalized UX.

    That’s where we begin. 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? The Personalization Pyramid is a designer-centric framework for establishing human-centered personalization initiatives that cover information, 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 understand 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 begin with identical starting points.

    Common scenarios for starting a personalisation task:

    • Your business or client made a purchase to support personalization of 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 approach, parties of contention
    • 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 the personal service be provided?
    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. Natural Data: What wider set of data is conceivable ( now in our environment ) to allow you to optimize?

    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 pondering periods, and will include cases for you here.

    Starting at the Top

    The elements of the pyramids are as follows:

    North Star

    Ultimately, you want a North Star in your personalization program, whether big or small. The North Star defines the (one ) overall mission of the personalization program. What are your goals, exactly? North Stars cast a ghost. The darkness is bigger the sun, the sun, and so on. Example of North Starts may incorporate:

      Function: Use simple user inputs to optimize. Examples:” Raw” messages, basic search effects, system user settings and settings options, general flexibility, basic improvements
    1. Feature: Self-contained customisation component. Examples:” Cooked” notifications, advanced optimizations ( geolocation ), basic dynamic messaging, customized modules, automations, recommenders
    2. User experience: Personal consumer experiences across various user 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 aid in accelerating designing with user intentions, as in any great UX design. Goals are the military and tangible metrics that may prove the entire program is effective. Start with your existing analytics and calculation system, as well as metrics that you can benchmark against. In some cases, new targets may be ideal. The most important thing to consider is that personalisation is more of a means of achieving an objective than a desired result. Common targets include:

    • Conversion
    • Time spent on work
    • Net promoter score ( NPS)
    • Satisfaction of the customers

    Touchpoints

    Touchpoints are where the personalisation happens. One of your main responsibilities as a UX artist will be in this area. The connections available to you will depend on how your personalization and associated technologies capabilities are instrumented, and should be rooted in improving a person’s experience at a certain point in the trip. Touchpoints can be multi-device ( mobile, in-store, website ), as well as more specific ( web banner, web pop-up, etc. ). Voici some illustrations:

    Touchpoints at the channel level

    • 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
    • Web home page

    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, context, 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

    Personalization Content Model

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

    We’ve written a lot more in depth about each of these models elsewhere, so be sure to 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 consider 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 at the least. Here are some examples from the personalization pyramid:

    • Unknown
    • Guest
    • Authenticated
    • Default
    • Referred
    • Role
    • Cohort
    • Unique ID

    Actionable information

    Every organization with any digital presence has data. It’s a matter of examining what user data you can ethically collect, its inherent reliability and value, and how you can use it ( sometimes referred to as “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. Voici some illustrations:

    There is a progression of profiling when it comes to recognizing and making decisioning about different audiences and their signals. As user data volume and time and confidence increase, it varies more granularly to more precise constructs about ever-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 key 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

    Any effective personalization strategy must take into account near, middle, and long-term objectives. 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, all personalization activities follow the same grammatical convention, just like every sentence contains both 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 necessary value? Or a doctor’s? Or a teacher’s? They all have fantastic sounds. When humility is our guiding light, the course is usually available for fulfillment, development, relation, and commitment. We’re going to speak about why in this section.

    That said, this is a guide for developers, and to that conclusion, I’d like to begin with a story—well, a voyage, actually. It’s a private one, and I’m going to make myself a little prone along the way. I call it:

    The Ludicrous Pate of Justin: The Tale of Justin

    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, what piqued my interest was how these traditional skills could be applied to a young online landscape. This theme may eventually form the rest of my profession.

    So I devoured 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 design existed in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Manufacturers at the time were all figuring out how to use layout and visual connection to the online environment. What regulations were in place? How may we break them and also engage, entertain, and present information? How was my values, which include modesty, respect, and connection, coincide with that on a more general level? I was eager to find out.

    Those are classic factors between non-career relationships and the world of design, even though I’m talking about a different time. 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 primary 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 visualizing how the idea of a living sketchbook was conveyed. Quite skeuomorphic. This one involved sketching and then passing a Photoshop file back and forth to experiment with various customer interactions with fellow artist and dear companion Marc Clancy, who is now a co-founder of the creative task organizing app Milanote. Finally, I’d break it down and protocol 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 graphic designer friends and I developed from the beginning.

    Design news portals were incredibly popular at the time, and they now considered Tweet-sized, small-format snippets of 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. Below are some content panes that show general news (tech, design ) and news centered on Mac. 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 of the website’s backbone was made up of global design + illustration + news author collaboration. The backbone 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 larger-than-anyone experience and establishing a global audience.

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

    Why am I taking you on this journey of design memory lane, 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 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 given moment, stand out and grab my attention? That is a fascinating question. In this example, the user’s desktop is tidy, but think of a more realistic example with icon pandemonium. How did it maintain cohesion among the group, for example, if an icon was a part of a larger system grouping ( fonts, extensions, control panels )?

    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 while expanding the concept 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 made use of 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. solving problems. 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.

    This is the Kaliber 1000, or K10k, abbreviated. K10k was founded in 1998 by Michael Schmidt and Toke Nygaard, and was the design news portal on the web during this period. It was the ideal setting for me, my friend, with its pixel art-filled presentation, meticulous attention to detail, and many of the site’s more well-known designers who were invited to be news authors. 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 that I was one of their very limited group of news writers who could contribute 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 actually changed into a colossal asshole in about a year of school, not less. The press and the praise became what fulfilled me, and they went straight to my head. They inflated my ego. I actually felt somewhat superior to my fellow designers.

    The casualties? My design stagnated. My evolution has stagnated, as is its evolution.

    I felt so supremely confident in my abilities that I effectively stopped researching and discovering. When my first instinct was to sketch concepts or iterate ideas in lead, I instead leaped right into Photoshop. I drew my inspiration from the smallest of sources ( and with blinders on ). Any criticism of my work from my fellow students was frequently vehemently dissented. The most tragic loss: I had lost touch with my values.

    My ego almost destroyed some of my friendships and blossoming professional relationships. 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.

    It’s true, I initially didn’t accept it, but after much reflection, I was able to accept it. 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 use 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 often regarded as works of art unto themselves because they depict what is actually happening inside the Collider during any given particle collision event.

    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, in this role,

    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, which involved visiting the Fermilab location and observing 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. This made it easier for them to pore over a lot of data during the day and lessen their strain on their eyes. And Fermilab and CERN are government entities with rigorous accessibility standards, so my knowledge in that realm also grew. Another crucial form of communication 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 phrases “grow” and “evolve” in particular. If we are always students of our craft, we are also continually making ourselves available to evolve. Yes, we have years of practical design experience behind us. Or the focused lab sessions from a UX bootcamp. or the work portfolio with monograms. 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. There will never be a designer like us.

  • I am a creative.

    I am a creative.

    I am imaginative. What I do is alchemy. It is a secret. Instead of letting it get done by me, I do it.

    I have a creative side. Certainly all creative people approve of this brand. Not all people see themselves in this manner. Some innovative persons incorporate technology into their work. I value their assertion, which is true. Perhaps I also have a little bit of fear for them. However, my method is unique; my being is unique.

    It distracts you to apologize and qualify in progress. My head uses that to destroy me. I’ll leave it alone for today. I may regret and be qualified at any time. after I’ve said what I should have. which is difficult enough.

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

    Sometimes it does. Maybe what I need to make arrives in a flash. I’ve learned to avoid saying it right away because they think you don’t work hard enough when you realize that sometimes the plan just comes along and it is the best plan and you know it is the best idea.

    Maybe I work and work and work until the thought strikes me. Maybe it arrives right away and I don’t remind people for three weeks. Maybe I get so excited about something that just happened that I blurt it out and didn’t stop myself. like a child who discovered a reward in a box of Cracker Jacks. I occasionally manage to 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 passion has faded.

    Joy should only be saved for the meet, when it matters. Certainly the informal get-together that comes before that meeting with two more discussions. Nothing understands why we hold these gatherings. We keep saying we’re going to get rid of them, but we just keep trying to find different 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. And who you are and how you go about doing it. 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. Often 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 may hammer apart and often find it useful to surround myself with images or information. Often going for a walk is what I can do. There is a Eureka, which has nothing to do with boiling pots and sizzling petrol, and I may be making dinner. I frequently have a plan for action when I wake up. 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 ingenuity, in my opinion, originates in that other world. The one that we enter in ambitions and, possibly, before and after death. 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. But that is yet another diversion. And a sad one. Whether or not I am innovative or not, this may be on a much larger issue. But that’s not how I came around, though.

    Often, the outcome is evasion. also suffering. You are familiar with the adage” the tortured musician”? Even when the artist is trying to write a soft drink song, a call in a worn-out comedy, or a budget ask, that word is correct.

    Some individuals who detest being called artistic perhaps been closeted artists, but that’s between them and their gods. No act here. Your assertions are also accurate. However, mine is for me.

    Artists are recognized as artists.

    Disadvantages know cons, just like real rappers recognize true rappers, just like queers recognize queers. People have a lot of regard for artists. We respect, follow, and almost deify the excellent ones. Of course, it is dreadful to revere any person. We’ve been given a warning. We are more knowledgeable. We are aware that people are really people. They argue, they are depressed, they regret their most critical decisions, they are weak and hungry, they can be violent, and they can be as ridiculous as we can if, like us, they are clay. But. But. However, they produce this incredible point. They give birth to something that may not exist without them and did not exist before them. They are thought’s founders. And since it’s only lying there, I suppose I should add that they are the inventor’s parents. Ba ho backside! Okay, that’s all said and done. Continue.

    Creatives denigrate our personal small accomplishments because they are compared to those of the great people. Wonderful video! I‘m not Miyazaki, though. That is brilliance right now. That is brilliance directly from God’s heart. I created this drained small thing. It essentially fell off the back of the pumpkin trailer. The carrots weren’t actually new, either.

    Artists is aware that they are at best Some. Also Mozart’s original artists believe that.

    I have a creative side. I haven’t worked in advertising in 30 times, but my former artistic managers are the ones who make my hallucinations. They are correct to do that. When it really counts, my brain goes flat because I am too lazy and simplistic. No medication is available to treat artistic difficulties.

    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 lines and gaze blankly before beginning that task.

    I can move ten times more quickly than those who aren’t creative, 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 work 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 fantastic task. I have an addiction to the delay hurry. I also have a fear of the climb.

    I don’t create art.

    I have a creative side. Never 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 accomplishments 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, my decisions are based on my own senses. 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 word I’ve said irritate me. Ask two artists a topic and find three opinions. No matter how we does 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 creative.

    I have a creative side. I lament my lack of taste in the areas of human knowledge that I know quite small, that is to say about everything. And I put my taste before everything else in the things that are most important to me, or perhaps more precisely, to my obsessions. Without my passions, 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 much. No actually. No really. Because so much in existence 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 spend way too much time making the next thing, given that almost nothing I create did achieve the level of brilliance I conceive of.

    I have a creative side. I think that method is the greatest secret. 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 scared of forgetting what I was saying because I was as scared as I might be of you seeing through my sad gestures toward the gorgeous.

    There. I believe I’ve said it.

  • Opportunities for AI in Accessibility

    Opportunities for AI in Accessibility

    I was completely moved by Joe Dolson’s subsequent article on the crossroads of AI and convenience, both in terms of the suspicion he has regarding 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 available 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. To be clear, I want to take some time to talk about what’s possible in hope that we’ll find it one day. There are, and we’ve needed to address them, like, yesterday.

    Other text

    Joe’s article spends a lot of time addressing computer-vision types ‘ ability to create alternative words. He raises a lot of appropriate points regarding the state of the world 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 image 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 ( should probably have descriptions ) and those that are purely decorative ( couldn’t possibly need a description ) either. Nonetheless, I still think there’s possible in this area.

    As Joe points out, far text editing via human-in-the-loop should be a given. And if AI can intervene to provide a starting place for alt text, even if the rapid might say 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 station a design to examine image usage in context, this may help us more quickly determine which images are likely to be elegant and which ones are likely to be 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 merely stated the chart’s name and the type of representation it was:” Pie chart comparing smartphone use to have phone usage in US households making under$ 30, 000 annually.” ( That would be a pretty bad alt text for a chart because it would frequently leave many unanswered questions about the data, but let’s just assume that that was the description in place. ) If your website knew that that picture was a pie chart ( because an ship 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 are there?
    • Is there a group of people that don’t fall into either of these buckets?
    • What number is that?

    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. 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 could ask it to switch colors for patterns? That seems like a possibility given the chat-based interfaces and our current ability to manipulate images in today’s AI tools.

    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 put her book Algorithms of Oppression, she hit the nail on the head. Although her book focused on the ways that 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. A large portion of this is attributable to the lack of diversity in those who create and shape 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 employment for people who are neurodivers. Based on more than 75 data points, they match job seekers with potential employers using an algorithm. 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 issues relating to 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.

    More people with disabilities can be used to create algorithms, which can lessen the likelihood that they will harm their communities. That’s why diverse teams are so crucial.

    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 follow a group of white men who are not white or aren’t white and who also discuss AI, it might be wise to follow those who are also disabled or who are not white. If you followed its advice, you might gain a more in-depth and nuanced understanding of 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. This technology can also be used to create audio deepfakes, so we need to approach it responsibly, but the technology has truly transformative potential.
    • 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 lead to more inclusive data sets that enable them to use their computers and other devices more effectively and with just their voices.
    • Text transformation. The most recent generation of LLMs is capable of altering already-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. Our differences must be reflected in the data we use to develop new models, and those who provide that valuable information must be compensated for doing so. Stronger models can be created using inclusive data sets, which lead to more equitable outcomes.

    Want a model that doesn’t demean or patronize or objectify people with disabilities? Make sure that you include information about disabilities that has been written by people with a variety of disabilities 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 be replacing human copy editors anytime soon when it comes to sensitivity reading.

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


    I have no doubt that AI has the potential to harm people today, tomorrow, and long into the future. However, I also think that we can acknowledge this and make thoughtful, thoughtful, and intentional changes in our approaches to AI that will reduce harm over time as well. Today, tomorrow, and well into the future.


    Thanks to Kartik Sawhney for assisting me with writing this article, Ashley Bischoff for her invaluable editorial assistance, and of course Joe Dolson for the prompt.

  • The Wax and the Wane of the Web

    The Wax and the Wane of the Web

    When you begin to believe you have all figured out, everyone does change, in my experience. Simply as you start to get the hang of injections, diapers, and ordinary sleep, it’s time for solid foods, potty training, and nighttime sleep. When those are determined, school and occasional naps are in order. The cycle goes on and on.

    The same holds true for those of us who are currently employed in design and development. Having worked on the web for about three years at this point, I’ve seen the typical wax and wane of concepts, strategies, and systems. Every day we as developers and designers re-enter the familiar pattern, a brand-new technology or thought emerges to shake things up and completely alter the world.

    How we got below

    I built my first website in the mid-’90s. Design and development on the web back then was a free-for-all, with few established norms. For any layout aside from a single column, we used table elements, often with empty cells containing a single pixel spacer GIF to add empty space. We styled text with numerous font tags, nesting the tags every time we wanted to vary the font style. And we had only three or four typefaces to choose from: Arial, Courier, or Times New Roman. When Verdana and Georgia came out in 1996, we rejoiced because our options had nearly doubled. The only safe colors to choose from were the 216 “web safe” colors known to work across platforms. The few interactive elements (like contact forms, guest books, and counters) were mostly powered by CGI scripts (predominantly written in Perl at the time). Achieving any kind of unique look involved a pile of hacks all the way down. Interaction was often limited to specific pages in a site.

    The development of online standards

    At the turn of the century, a new cycle started. Crufty code littered with table layouts and font tags waned, and a push for web standards waxed. Newer technologies like CSS got more widespread adoption by browsers makers, developers, and designers. This shift toward standards didn’t happen accidentally or overnight. It took active engagement between the W3C and browser vendors and heavy evangelism from folks like the Web Standards Project to build standards. A List Apart and books like Designing with Web Standards by Jeffrey Zeldman played key roles in teaching developers and designers why standards are important, how to implement them, and how to sell them to their organizations. And approaches like progressive enhancement introduced the idea that content should be available for all browsers—with additional enhancements available for more advanced browsers. Meanwhile, sites like the CSS Zen Garden showcased just how powerful and versatile CSS can be when combined with a solid semantic HTML structure.

    Server-side language like PHP, Java, and.NET took Perl as the primary back-end computers, and the cgi-bin was tossed in the garbage bin. The first age of internet programs started with content-management systems (especially those used in blogs like Blogger, Grey Matter, Movable Type, and WordPress ), with these better server-side equipment. In the mid-2000s, AJAX opened gates for sequential interaction between the front end and back finish. Pages had now revise their content without having to reload it. A grain of Script frameworks like Prototype, YUI, and ruby arose to aid developers develop more credible client-side interaction across browsers that had wildly varying levels of standards support. Techniques like image replacement enable the use of fonts by skilled designers and developers. And technologies like Flash made it possible to add animations, games, and even more interactivity.

    The industry was reenergized by these new tools, standards, and methods in many ways. Web design flourished as designers and developers explored more diverse styles and layouts. However, we still relied heavily on hacks. Early CSS was a huge improvement over table-based layouts when it came to basic layout and text styling, but its limitations at the time meant that designers and developers still relied heavily on images for complex shapes ( such as rounded or angled corners ) and tiled backgrounds for the appearance of full-length columns (among other hacks ). All kinds of nested floats or absolute positioning ( or both ) were necessary for complicated layouts. Flash and image replacement for custom fonts was a great start toward varying the typefaces from the big five, but both hacks introduced accessibility and performance problems. And JavaScript libraries made it simple for anyone to add a dash of interaction to pages, even at the expense of double, even quadrupling, the download size of basic websites.

    The web as software platform

    The interplay between the front end and the back end continued to grow, which led to the development of the current era of modern web applications. Between expanded server-side programming languages ( which kept growing to include Ruby, Python, Go, and others ) and newer front-end tools like React, Vue, and Angular, we could build fully capable software on the web. Along with these tools, there were additional options, such as collaborative build automation, collaborative version control, and shared package libraries. What was once primarily an environment for linked documents became a realm of infinite possibilities.

    Mobile devices also increased in their capabilities, and they gave us access to internet in our pockets at the same time. Mobile apps and responsive design opened up opportunities for new interactions anywhere and any time.

    This fusion of potent mobile devices and potent development tools contributed to the growth of social media and other centralized tools for user interaction and consumption. As it became easier and more common to connect with others directly on Twitter, Facebook, and even Slack, the desire for hosted personal sites waned. Social media provided connections on a global scale, with both positive and negative outcomes.

    Want a much more extensive history of how we got here, with some other takes on ways that we can improve? ” Of Time and the Web” was written by Jeremy Keith. Or check out the” Web Design History Timeline” at the Web Design Museum. A fun tour of” Internet Artifacts” is also available from Neal Agarwal.

    Where we are now

    It seems like we’ve reached yet another significant turning point in the last couple of years. As social-media platforms fracture and wane, there’s been a growing interest in owning our own content again. There are many different ways to create a website, from the tried-and-true classic of hosting plain HTML files to static site generators to content management systems of all varieties. The fracturing of social media also comes with a cost: we lose crucial infrastructure for discovery and connection. Webmentions, RSS, ActivityPub, and other IndieWeb tools can be useful in this regard, but they’re still largely underdeveloped and difficult to use for the less geeky. We can build amazing personal websites and add to them regularly, but without discovery and connection, it can sometimes feel like we may as well be shouting into the void.

    Browser support for CSS, JavaScript, and other web components has increased, particularly with initiatives like Interop. New technologies gain support across the board in a fraction of the time that they used to. I frequently find out about a new feature and check its browser support only to discover that its coverage is already over 80 %. Nowadays, the barrier to using newer techniques often isn’t browser support but simply the limits of how quickly designers and developers can learn what’s available and how to adopt it.

    With a few commands and a few lines of code, we can currently prototype almost any concept. All the tools that we now have available make it easier than ever to start something new. However, the upfront cost these frameworks may save in initial delivery eventually comes down as the maintenance and upgrading they become a part of our technical debt.

    If we rely on third-party frameworks, adopting new standards can sometimes take longer since we may have to wait for those frameworks to adopt those standards. These frameworks, which previously made it easier to adopt new techniques sooner, have since evolved into obstacles. These same frameworks often come with performance costs too, forcing users to wait for scripts to load before they can read or interact with pages. And when scripts fail ( whether due to poor code, network issues, or other environmental factors ), users frequently have no choice but to use blank or broken pages.

    Where do we go from here?

    Hacks of today help to shape standards for the future. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with embracing hacks —for now—to move the present forward. Problems only arise when we refuse to acknowledge that they are hacks or when we choose not to replace them. So what can we do to create the future we want for the web?

    Build for the long haul. Optimize for performance, for accessibility, and for the user. weigh the price of those user-friendly tools. They may make your job a little easier today, but how do they affect everything else? What does each user pay? To future developers? to the adoption of standards? Sometimes the convenience may be worth it. Sometimes it’s just a hack that you’ve gotten used to. And sometimes it’s holding you back from even better options.

    Start with standards. Standards continue to evolve over time, but browsers have done a remarkably good job of continuing to support older standards. The same holds true for third-party frameworks, though. Sites built with even the hackiest of HTML from the’ 90s still work just fine today. The same can’t be said about websites created with frameworks even after a few years.

    Design with care. Consider the effects of each choice, whether your craft is code, pixels, or processes. The convenience of many a modern tool comes at the cost of not always understanding the underlying decisions that have led to its design and not always considering the impact that those decisions can have. Use the time saved by modern tools to think more carefully and make decisions with care rather than rushing to “move fast and break things.”

    Always be learning. If you’re constantly learning, you’re also developing. Sometimes it may be hard to pinpoint what’s worth learning and what’s just today’s hack. Even if you were to concentrate solely on learning standards, you might end up focusing on something that won’t matter next year. ( Remember XHTML? ) However, ongoing learning opens up new connections in your brain, and the techniques you learn in one day may be used to guide different experiments in the future.

    Play, experiment, and be weird! The ultimate experiment is this web we created. It’s the single largest human endeavor in history, and yet each of us can create our own pocket within it. Be brave and make new friends. Build a playground for ideas. Create absurd experiments in your own crazy science lab. Start your own small business. There has never been a place where we have more room to be creative, take risks, and discover our potential.

    Share and amplify. As you play, experiment, and learn, share what has worked for you. Write on your own website, post on whichever social media site you prefer, or shout it from a TikTok. Write something for A List Apart! But take the time to amplify others too: find new voices, learn from them, and share what they’ve taught you.

    Go ahead and create a masterpiece.

    As designers and developers for the web ( and beyond ), we’re responsible for building the future every day, whether that may take the shape of personal websites, social media tools used by billions, or anything in between. Let’s incorporate our values into the products we produce, and let’s improve the world for everyone. Create that thing that only you are uniquely qualified to make. Then share it, improve it, re-use it, or create something new. Learn. Make. Share. Grow. Rinse and repeat. Everything will change whenever you believe you’ve mastered the web.

  • To Ignite a Personalization Practice, Run this Prepersonalization Workshop

    To Ignite a Personalization Practice, Run this Prepersonalization Workshop

    This is in the photo. You’ve joined a club at your business that’s designing innovative product features with an focus on technology or AI. Or perhaps your business only started using a personalization website. Either way, you’re designing with statistics. What’s next? When it comes to designing for personalization, there are many warning stories, no immediately achievement, and some guidelines for the baffled.

    The personalization space is real, between the dream of getting it right and the fear of it going wrong ( like when we encounter “persofails” in the spirit of a company that regularly asks regular people to buy more toilet seats ). It’s an particularly confusing place to be a modern professional without a map, a map, or a strategy.

    There are no Lonely Planet and some tour guides for those of you who want to personalize because powerful customisation is so dependent on each group’s talent, technology, and market position.

    But you can ensure that your group has packed its bags rationally.

    There’s a DIY method to increase your chances for achievement. You’ll at least at least disarm your boss ‘ irrational exuberance. Before the group you’ll need to properly plan.

    We refer to it as prepersonalization.

    Behind the audio

    Take into account the DJ have on Spotify, which was introduced last year.

    We’re used to seeing the polished final outcome of a personalization function. A personal have had to be developed, budgeted, and given priority before the year-end prize, the making-of-backstory, or the behind-the-scenes success chest. Before any customisation have goes live in your product or service, it lives amid a delay of valuable ideas for expressing consumer experiences more automatically.

    How do you decide where to position personalization wagers? How do you design regular interactions that hasn’t journey up users or—worse—breed mistrust? We’ve discovered that several budgeted programs second required one or more workshops to join key stakeholders and domestic customers of the technology in order to justify their continuous investments. Make it count.

    We’ve closely observed the same evolution with our consumers, from major software to young companies. In our experience with working on small and large customisation efforts, a program’s best monitor record—and its capacity to weather tough questions, work steadily toward shared answers, and manage its design and engineering efforts—turns on how successfully these prepersonalization activities play out.

    Effective workshops consistently save time, money, and overall well-being by separating successful future endeavors from unsuccessful ones.

    A personalization practice involves a multiyear effort of testing and feature development. It’s not a switch-flip in your tech stack. It’s best managed as a backlog that often evolves through three steps:

    1. customer experience optimization ( CXO, also known as A/B testing or experimentation )
    2. always-on automations ( whether rules-based or machine-generated )
    3. mature features or standalone product development ( such as Spotify’s DJ experience )

    This is why we created our progressive personalization framework and why we’re field-testing an accompanying deck of cards: we believe that there’s a base grammar, a set of “nouns and verbs” that your organization can use to design experiences that are customized, personalized, or automated. These cards are not necessary for you. But we strongly recommend that you create something similar, whether that might be digital or physical.

    Set the timer for your kitchen.

    How long does it take to cook up a prepersonalization workshop? The evaluation activities that we suggest include can last for a number of weeks ( and frequently do ). For the core workshop, we recommend aiming for two to three days. Details on the essential first-day activities are included in a summary of our broad approach.

    The full arc of the wider workshop is threefold:

      Kickstart: This specifies the terms of your engagement as you concentrate on both your team’s and your team’s readiness and drive.
    1. Plan your work: This is the heart of the card-based workshop activities where you specify a plan of attack and the scope of work.
    2. Work your plan: This stage essentially entails creating a competitive environment in which team members can individually present their own pilots that each contain a proof-of-concept project, its business case, and its operating model.

    Give yourself at least a day, split into two large time blocks, to power through a concentrated version of those first two phases.

    Kickstart: Apt your appetite

    We call the first lesson the “landscape of connected experience“. It looks at the possibilities for personalization in your organization. A connected experience, in our parlance, is any UX requiring the orchestration of multiple systems of record on the backend. This might be a marketing-automation platform combined with a content-management system. It could be a digital-asset manager combined with a customer-data platform.

    Give examples of connected experience interactions that you admire, find familiar, or even dislike, as examples of consumer and business-to-business examples. This should cover a representative range of personalization patterns, including automated app-based interactions ( such as onboarding sequences or wizards ), notifications, and recommenders. We have a list of these in the cards. Here’s a list of 142 different interactions to jog your thinking.

    It’s all about setting the tone. What are the possible paths for the practice in your organization? Here’s a long-form primer and a strategic framework for a broad perspective.

    Assess each example that you discuss for its complexity and the level of effort that you estimate that it would take for your team to deliver that feature ( or something similar ). We break down connected experiences into five categories in our cards: functions, features, experiences, complete products, and portfolios. Size your own build here. This will help to draw attention to the benefits of ongoing investment as well as the difference between what you currently offer and what you intend to offer in the future.

    Next, have your team plot each idea on the following 2×2 grid, which lays out the four enduring arguments for a personalized experience. This is crucial because it emphasizes how personalization can affect your own methods of working as well as your external customers. It’s also a reminder ( which is why we used the word argument earlier ) of the broader effort beyond these tactical interventions.

    Each team member should decide where they would like to place your company’s emphasis on your product or service. Naturally, you can’t prioritize all of them. Here, the goal is to show how various departments may view their own benefits from the effort, which can vary from one department to the next. Documenting your desired outcomes lets you know how the team internally aligns across representatives from different departments or functional areas.

    The third and final Kickstart activity is about filling in the personalization gap. Is your customer journey well documented? Will ensuring data and privacy is a major challenge too much? Do you have content metadata needs that you have to address? ( We’re pretty sure you do; it’s just a matter of acknowledging the magnitude of that need and finding a solution. ) In our cards, we’ve noted a number of program risks, including common team dispositions. For instance, our Detractor card lists six intractable stakeholder attitudes that prevent progress.

    Effectively collaborating and managing expectations is critical to your success. Consider the potential obstacles to your advancement in the future. Press the participants to name specific steps to overcome or mitigate those barriers in your organization. As research has shown, personalization initiatives face a number of common obstacles.

    At this point, you’ve hopefully discussed sample interactions, emphasized a key area of benefit, and flagged key gaps? You’re all set to go on, good.

    Hit that test kitchen

    Next, let’s take a look at what you’ll need to create personalization recipes. Personalization engines, which are robust software suites for automating and expressing dynamic content, can intimidate new customers. They give you a variety of options for how your organization can conduct its activities because of their broad and potent capabilities. This presents the question: Where do you begin when you’re configuring a connected experience?

    The key here is to avoid treating the installed software ( as one of our client executives humorously put it ) like some sort of dream kitchen. These software engines are more like test kitchens where your team can begin devising, tasting, and refining the snacks and meals that will become a part of your personalization program’s regularly evolving menu.

    Over the course of the workshop, the final menu of the prioritized backlog will be created. And creating “dishes” is the way that you’ll have individual team stakeholders construct personalized interactions that serve their needs or the needs of others.

    Recipes have ingredients in them, and those recipes have ingredients.

    Verify your ingredients

    Like a good product manager, you’ll make sure you have everything you need to make your desired interaction ( or that you can figure out what needs to be added to your pantry ) and that you validate with the right stakeholders present. These ingredients include the audience that you’re targeting, content and design elements, the context for the interaction, and your measure for how it’ll come together.

    This is not just about identifying needs. Documenting your personalizations as a series of if-then statements lets the team:

    1. compare findings to a common strategy for developing features, similar to how artists paint with the same color palette,
    2. specify a consistent set of interactions that users find uniform or familiar,
    3. and establish parity among performance indicators and key performance indicators as well.

    This helps you streamline your designs and your technical efforts while you deliver a shared palette of core motifs of your personalized or automated experience.

    Create a recipe.

    What ingredients are important to you? Consider the construct “what-what-when-why”

    • Who are your key audience segments or groups?
    • What content, what design elements, and under what circumstances will you give them?
    • And for which business and user benefits?

    Five years ago, we created these cards and card categories. We regularly play-test their fit with conference audiences and clients. And there are still fresh possibilities. But they all follow an underlying who-what-when-why logic.

    In the cards in the accompanying photo below, you can typically follow along with right to left in three examples of subscription-based reading apps.

    1. Nurture personalization: When a guest or an unknown visitor interacts with a product title, a banner or alert bar appears that makes it easier for them to encounter a related title they may want to read, saving them time.
    2. Welcome automation: An email is sent to a newly registered user to highlight the breadth of the content catalog and convert them to happy subscribers.
    3. Winback automation: Before their subscription lapses or after a recent failed renewal, a user is sent an email that gives them a promotional offer to suggest that they reconsider renewing or to remind them to renew.

    A good preworkshop activity might be to consider a first draft of what these cards might be for your organization, though we’ve also found that cocreating the recipes themselves can sometimes help this process. Start with a set of blank cards, and begin labeling and grouping them through the design process, eventually distilling them to a refined subset of highly useful candidate cards.

    The workshop’s later stages could be characterized as shifting from focusing on a cookbook to a more nuanced customer-journey mapping. Individual” cooks” will pitch their recipes to the team, using a common jobs-to-be-done format so that measurability and results are baked in, and from there, the resulting collection will be prioritized for finished design and delivery to production.

    Better architecture is necessary for better kitchens.

    Simplifying a customer experience is a complicated effort for those who are inside delivering it. Beware of anyone who contradicts your advice. With that being said,” Complicated problems can be hard to solve, but they are addressable with rules and recipes“.

    When a team is overfitting, it’s because they aren’t designing with their best data, which is why personalization turns into a laugh line. Like a sparse pantry, every organization has metadata debt to go along with its technical debt, and this creates a drag on personalization effectiveness. For instance, your AI’s output quality is in fact impacted by your IA. Spotify’s poster-child prowess today was unfathomable before they acquired a seemingly modest metadata startup that now powers its underlying information architecture.

    You can’t stand the heat, unquestionably…

    Personalization technology opens a doorway into a confounding ocean of possible designs. Only a disciplined and highly collaborative approach can achieve the necessary concentration and intention. So banish the dream kitchen. Instead, head to the test kitchen to save time, preserve job security, and avoid imagining the creative concepts that come from the doers in your organization. There are meals to serve and mouths to feed.

    This organizational framework gives you a fighting chance at long-term success as well as solid ground. Wiring up your information layer isn’t an overnight affair. However, you’ll have solid ground for success if you use the same cookbook and the same recipes. We designed these activities to make your organization’s needs concrete and clear, long before the hazards pile up.

    Although there are costs associated with purchasing this type of technology and product design, time well spent on sizing up and confronting your unique situation and digital skills. Don’t squander it. The pudding is the proof, as they say.