Human-centered design. Every successful company does it. How else would they be successful? If they do not focus on the customer, the human, why would anyone buy a product or service? Until participating in this class, that was the basic understanding I had about how to make a successful business run. Understand what the customer wants, and deliver it better than anyone else can. It seems simple enough, but the challenge lies with understanding the customer. Understanding, not knowledge, about the customer is what differentiates a successful product or service. It turns out that understanding is what is most difficult about a successful product or service.
One of the tools we learned that helps understand a person is the empathy map. This concept was completely new to me, which is a shame considering that I have spent over ten years leading and interacting with people in very stressful environments. My first iteration of the empathy map was on someone that is completely different in personality, disposition, and other characteristics. I chose to map a co-worker during the summer internship. My first impression was that the map, though easy to use in theory, was very difficult to actually employ. What made it hard, for me, was that I felt like I kept projecting my impressions of the person rather than actually capture what they were truly like. This made it uncomfortable because it made me realize how little I actually knew about this young lady and because I felt like I was not letting her true personality through. I felt like I was doing a disservice by not capturing her nature. I completed the assignment, discomfort aside, and then learned one of the benefits of the empathy map. It gets the wheels turning. I found that after the map had been turned in, I wondered about how this person would handle situations that arose. I found myself asking what she would think about current events or a particular news story. The empathy map made me think about some of her traits and characteristics in a way that I would have never considered. The second iteration was the empathy map for the project, developing a persona. This time, it was less uncomfortable because I understood that the empathy map works well long after it is completed. It was easier to “put myself in someone’s shoes” and fill in the blanks with my best guess or projections (being sure to capture those as assumptions to be tested) because I knew that it would lead to a better understanding during the research process. Really, it is that perspective that allows us to create the research in the first place.
Generative and ethnographic research tools and techniques were the other major revelation for me. I am quite familiar with gathering data and doing research in the traditional sense. I’ve taken and provided more surveys than I can remember. What I do remember is that they all seem to be straight forward and easy to understand what the survey creator wanted to know. The major problem with that, is that the survey respondents can misrepresent their actual needs, pain points, or requirements for various reasons. The research techniques taught in this class get to the root of the customer and allows the marketer to begin to understand how the customer views life, in general. Again, this process was difficult for me in the beginning. When drawing the “close to me” items, I struggled with what was meant by the phrase “things I can’t live without”. I could have put water and air, but aside from being difficult to draw, I didn’t think that was the purpose of the assignment. However, after explaining the things that I chose to draw, I realized how useful it could be in gaining insights. The other major challenge with this research, is applying it to the real world. In some cases, during the research process, I felt uncomfortable. First, it was difficult to explain why I was asking some of the questions without revealing the purpose (I didn’t want to get skewed results by the respondent knowing my objective). Second, I sometimes felt intrusive in doing the research. During one of the shop alongs, I am fairly certain that the respondent meant to purchase something but didn’t because I was present. While they had no issues with me accompanying them to the store, I felt like I was prying. I also started to question how useful the research methods were. The data seemed so scattered and convoluted. Then the lightbulb came on. As I interviewed and worked with more respondents, I started to see patterns and trends. It was an almost instant, and certainly dramatic shift, in how much I was learning about the individuals. While I still felt a bit intrusive, it was slightly easier knowing that the information was going to be used to solve a problem for those people. As the team compiled the data, we learned more and more about our persona and truly gained an understanding of what motivates them and where they encounter difficulty.
There was one topic that was not as useful in others during this project for me. This is a relative comparison because I certainly see the value in the topic, but this is one area that I have experience with. As an engineer, maintenance pilot, and car enthusiast, I have built and seen many prototypes. Sometimes, when working on a car or customizing something, prototypes were made out of paper, then cardboard, then wood, before ever cutting or welding metal. I have worked with computer aided design software to create and test digital prototypes of components that would be installed on a car or aircraft. I still think the topic is important for the class and the project. Not everyone understands the true value of a prototype. Feeling and holding the product can quickly identify a problem with weight, functionality, or design. The most important point regarding prototypes is to not “fall in love” with one.
My favorite part of the class is that most of it was taught with the learn by doing method. This method provides firsthand experience with a process and provides enough practice to be more comfortable using them. It also enhances the ability to remember concepts. Most importantly, it caused us to try the methods before we had others do the same. I am a firm believer in the phrase “don’t ever ask someone else to do something that you would not do yourself”. By doing the close to me exercise, I had enough experience to help respondents with the process without imparting my own information in the results. It has all been an effective, rewarding experience.
