Fwd: Snivelling about capitalism... was Primaryinterface

27 Oct 2006 - 6:32am
7 years ago
1 reply
318 reads
jbellis
2005

Dave, answers below.
Thanks, Jack
----- 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.
-Jack

Comments

27 Oct 2006 - 11:27am
Antonella Pavese
2006

Jack,
I was not debating the business value of installing ACMs, but rather
the business value of focusing only on immediate profit at the expense
of the user experience (which will drive future profit and customer
loyalty), responding to your statement that companies tend to focus
only on profit.
I think there are valid reasons from a business point of view and a
customer point of view to install ACMs, but currently most of them are
not usable enough to meet the business goal.

On 10/27/06, jackbellis.com <jackbellis at hotmail.com> wrote:
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
> Dave, answers below.
> Thanks, Jack
> ----- 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.
> -Jack
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

--
Antonella Pavese
-----------------------------------------
antonella.pavese at gmail.com
http://www.antonellapavese.com/

Syndicate content Get the feed