Fwd: Snivelling about capitalism... was Primaryinterface
27 Oct 2006 - 6:32am
7 years ago
Dave, answers below.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Chiu" <dave at d4v3.net>
> By implication, then, the designers involved in producing said ACMs are > just as culpable in this charade.
There's no charade. ACMs are not installed with the goal of taking any more
money out of customer pockets than human cashiers.
> Responses typically revolve around "it's all about business and money" > or "designers are at the mercy of business",
> were at least some of the lessons I learned in grad school > relevant and applicable to the real world? (You know, all that fancy > talk about user-centered design and suchlike.)
Everything good that you learned about design was relevant and you're
staring at no gun barrels. My point is that the ACM vendor goes to Home
Depot's CFO and says:
-This system will cost you $75M, maybe $250, maybe $0.8B.
-(Your competitors will be doing it sooner or later, and )saving money on
labor as well as making checkout faster (if they buy enough machines and
keep the right human/robot ratio). The message that is unnecessary for the
salesman to even say is that you'll be out of business if you don't compete.
-The message about whether it improves customer service (the elderly who
surpriingly WANT to self-checkout) or destroys it, might make it to the 20th
page of the proposal, or a discussion with senior staff. Could it have been
a good CFO's very first thought? Sure.
-All that has nothing to do with the Ix person's mission. Once the system is
committed to, we try to make the best customer experience possible...
apparently all the while complaining about capitalism. But we can't make the
best customer experience, if as a field of expertise, we can't even
establish consensus on whether the primary interface is a valid starting
point... a common ancestor from which all customer checkout experiences
derive and should be designed.