Talk to the Hand: Dan Saffer and gestural interfaces, by Andy Polaine

14 Feb 2009 - 8:48am
5 years ago
11 replies
568 reads
SemanticWill
2007

Talk to the Hand: Dan Saffer and gestural interfaces, by Andy Polaine
In Core77
http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq

"Product designers are now service designers," argues Saffer. "We
can't help it. Most of the devices we're making now are part of a
network, or need to work with other devices, or at a minimum have a
website. Our products are now services."

http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq

So after reading the article - what do you think? Do we as interaction
designers need to think more seriously about service design? Our own
Jeff Howard did significant research about service design and posted
many useful articles about this here:
http://www.howardesign.com/exp/service/

~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel: +1.617.281.1281 | will at semanticfoundry.com
http://blog.semanticfoundry.com
aim: semanticwill
gtalk: semanticwill
twitter: semanticwill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments

14 Feb 2009 - 9:11am
Mark Schraad
2006

Its easy to get into a semantic discussion here, but from the point
of view of a business person and researcher... with a back ground in
design, there are times when the distinction between service and
product are not helpful. A product, after all is the physical portion
of a service. I can not think of a product that is not really the
physical tool for delivering a service. In a more general sense... I
think it helps to think of them as offerings. These offerings have
attributes. Calling them attributes helps us to stay out of the
product manager mindset of calling them features. When they become
features, the salability rather than utility becomes the focus.

To directly answer your questions, yes, designers do need to think
beyond the 'thing'. Further, I think that there is a lot of activity
in developing both product and services that occur well before
designers are typically involved. Those activities could be done
better by incorporating methods and practices that design is deeply
invested in. Being user centric, qualitative research, iterative
planing, visual thinking and concept mapping to name just a few.

When biz dev folks start to brainstorm or seed ideas, they typically
start with a revenue model or a partnership. They are effectively
beginning to design a product or service. Unfortunately, they are
often not equipped for this sort of practice... well at least in my
opinion. Designers can either make themselves available or not... but
the tools I mentioned are helpful and add value in this stage. If
designers do not bring them to the table, it is likely that the biz
folks will eventually find and utilize them on their own.

Mark

On Feb 14, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Will Evans wrote:

> Talk to the Hand: Dan Saffer and gestural interfaces, by Andy Polaine
> In Core77
> http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq
>
> "Product designers are now service designers," argues Saffer. "We
> can't help it. Most of the devices we're making now are part of a
> network, or need to work with other devices, or at a minimum have a
> website. Our products are now services."
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq
>
> So after reading the article - what do you think? Do we as
> interaction designers need to think more seriously about service
> design? Our own Jeff Howard did significant research about service
> design and posted many useful articles about this here:
> http://www.howardesign.com/exp/service/
>
>
>
> ~ will
>
> "Where you innovate, how you innovate,
> and what you innovate are design problems"
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Will Evans | User Experience Architect
> tel: +1.617.281.1281 | will at semanticfoundry.com
> http://blog.semanticfoundry.com
> aim: semanticwill
> gtalk: semanticwill
> twitter: semanticwill
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

14 Feb 2009 - 12:26pm
Phillip Hunter
2006

Will (and Mark),

I think we have to think about some degree of service design in many
contexts. And in some cases, such as a service website, a
distinction is nearly meaningless. In my niche area of voice
interaction, not only are we usually designing customer service,
there are often clear connection points to events and other
interactions occurring immediately before and after the interaction
we design. Sometimes we are asked for input and feedback on those,
but more frequently we are either not informed or told that there is
nothing to be done about them. Yet we are asked, perhaps implicitly,
to accommodate the effects of what precedes and to prepare for what
comes after.

Many times in the course of my career I have wanted to exercise
greater influence over those connecting interactions, but it is
almost never a matter of making myself "available or not". The
problem that faces us, whether we design entire services or specific
services and products is whether the business owners are even aware
of their need to involve design and whether they want to.

I would love to get much more involved in designing services. I
think of it as interaction design at a meta-level as well as for the
traditional deeper dive points.

ph

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711

14 Feb 2009 - 1:38pm
Jeff Howard
2004

When I put together that literature review, it had nothing to do with
network-enabled products, and that's not really what service
designers are concerned with.

Even if an interaction designer were to create a touchpoint
specifically for a service, something like the digital kiosks for Jet
Blue, that wouldn%u2019t make it service design. Service design
isn%u2019t in the touchpoint. It%u2019s in the interconnections
between touchpoints and in the behaviors that connect people. Service
design lives in the ecology, not the artifacts.

It's important for product designers to be aware of the larger
context for products they design, but that doesn't make them service
designers.

// jeff

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711

14 Feb 2009 - 2:02pm
Nasir Barday
2006

You could interpret Dan's comment as a call for us to design not just
the single touchpoints that make up services, but to design that whole
ecosystem. I don't think he meant that by designing one element of a
service, that we are designing the entire service.

- N

14 Feb 2009 - 2:22pm
SemanticWill
2007

There was actually an explicit reason why I juxtaposed to seemingly
contradictory uses of the term "service design" in Andy/Dan's article
in Core77 with your research on the more classical understanding of
what service designer/s are/do.

It starts first with the article from BW about Design Thinking and IDEO
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_20/b3883001_mz001.htm
"IDEO redefined good design by creating experiences, not just
products. Now it's changing the way companies innovate

Kaiser Permanente, the largest health maintenance organization in the
U.S., was developing a long-range growth plan in 2003 that would
attract more patients and cut costs. Kaiser has hundreds of medical
offices and hospitals and thought it might have to replace many of
them with expensive next-generation buildings. It hired IDEO, the Palo
Alto (Calif.) design firm, for help. Kaiser execs didn't know it then,
but they were about to go on a fascinating journey of self-discovery.
That's because of IDEO's novel approach. For starters, Kaiser nurses,
doctors, and facilities managers teamed up with IDEO's social
scientists, designers, architects, and engineers and observed patients
as they made their way through their medical facilities. At times,
they played the role of patient themselves. "
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_20/b3883001_mz001.htm

And then I got thinking about the experience design in the Apple
store, a retail environment governed more by traditional service
design -- but, because associates now walk around with networked
handheld devices, something clearly more associated with interaction
design - we can easily conjure a scenario whereby the interaction
designer of the device, attached to the network, can directly impact
the holistic experience of the customer in queue to buy an iPhone in
the store. It now seems more important that those two seemingly
disparate disciplines are being conjoined in new and interesting ways.

The same could be said about the recursive experience created during
the IxD09 conference where attendees where experiencing the
conference, taking pictures and twittering that experience, and then
observing their twitter stream in the common areas of the conference
creating and interesting and accelerating feedback loop. Networks,
devices, audiences all connected together in an ecosystem of branded
experience are creating new challenges for us - I think was the point
I was making by contrasting the two, bumping them up against each
other - so that I could write this post.

:-)

~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel: +1.617.281.1281 | will at semanticfoundry.com
http://blog.semanticfoundry.com
aim: semanticwill
gtalk: semanticwill
twitter: semanticwill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Feb 14, 2009, at 10:38 AM, Jeff Howard wrote:

> When I put together that literature review, it had nothing to do with
> network-enabled products, and that's not really what service
> designers are concerned with.
>
> Even if an interaction designer were to create a touchpoint
> specifically for a service, something like the digital kiosks for Jet
> Blue, that wouldn%u2019t make it service design. Service design
> isn%u2019t in the touchpoint. It%u2019s in the interconnections
> between touchpoints and in the behaviors that connect people. Service
> design lives in the ecology, not the artifacts.
>
> It's important for product designers to be aware of the larger
> context for products they design, but that doesn't make them service
> designers.
>
> // jeff
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

14 Feb 2009 - 2:55pm
Nasir Barday
2006

To Will's last point, if you want to get involved with a service
design project, the Interaction Conference is a great way to get your
hands dirty. I took on Production Management this year, which means I
developed and executed this year's Twitter/Flickr feed concept,
plotted out the layouts of the rooms and the keynote stage, as well as
the process for onboarding speakers for each session, when to play
music, and show the feed. The final deliverable was a 22 page document
to make all of this information clear and comprehensible by hotel
staff, event planners, production crew, and our volunteers.

Of course, I'm preaching to the choir here in responding to Will, as
he and Todd Warfel are the lead Experience Designers for next year. No
pressure, y'alls :-).

If you have suggestions or would like to help out next February at
Interaction 10 | Savannah, shoot an e-mail to interaction10 at ixda.org.

- Nasir

14 Feb 2009 - 3:06pm
Dan Saffer
2003

On Feb 14, 2009, at 11:02 AM, Nasir Barday wrote:

> You could interpret Dan's comment as a call for us to design not just
> the single touchpoints that make up services, but to design that whole
> ecosystem. I don't think he meant that by designing one element of a
> service, that we are designing the entire service.

Here was the entire quote (which was edited for space):

"Product designers are now service designers. We can't help it. Most
of the devices we're making now are part of a network, or need to work
with other devices, or at a minimum have a website. Our products are
now services. Objects are now carriers of behavior. When we put a
service design lens on our work, it changes how you think about the
product, by seeing it as a piece of a larger ecosystem."

I'm not suggesting interaction designers always design the whole
ecosystem (which would be service design, and is indeed sometimes the
case) but rather that any product we design these days is likely part
of a service, so it helps to think about products via that framework.
And almost any networked device is automatically part of some sort of
ecosystem.

It's also good to think about the ecosystem in terms of functionality,
from a strategic perspective. Where should certain pieces of
functionality (or the entire product itself) live? On a device,
online, on the desktop, a hybrid?

Dan

Dan Saffer
Principal, Kicker Studio
http://www.kickerstudio.com
http://www.odannyboy.com

14 Feb 2009 - 3:26pm
Phillip Hunter
2006

Jeff,

I'm glad you chimed in. I admit I am very much a neophyte in this
area. So let me ask this. You wrote "service design isn't in the
touchpoint. It's in the interconnections between touchpoints and in
the behaviors that connect people. Service design lives in the
ecology, not the artifacts." I understand your point, but service
design is also in the artifacts, right? Wouldn't the service be a
continuous thread running through at the high and deeper levels,
inhabiting the experience and the artifacts? Certainly multiple
elements of the overall design, such as visuals, support both the
entire service as well as the interaction with a particular artifact.

Being very new to this idea, I am really asking, not trying to argue
through questions. I would like to learn much more and plan on some
loitering at design for service to get more acquainted with the
ideas.

Thanks,
ph

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711

14 Feb 2009 - 3:49pm
Jeff Howard
2004

Hi Will,

I agree that interaction designers can have an impact on services.
Service design is extremely multi-disciplinary. Graphic design,
industrial design, architecture, anthropology, operations, business.
Lots of collaboration going on.

Service design seems new and sexy, and interaction designers are good
candidates to become service designers. But there are important
cultural differences.

To Nasir's point about facilitating the Vancouver conference, if
you're designing the ecology you need to be as invested in the
non-digital components of the encounter as you are in the digital. To
care as much about the intangible processes as the artifacts that
support them. Designers also need to be prepared to give up a degree
of control to become effective service designers. To embrace
participatory design principles. To facilitate co-design.

The biggest hurdle is that they need to stop being interaction
designers; at least in the popular sense.

// jeff

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711

14 Feb 2009 - 9:00pm
Jarod Tang
2007

Hi Mark,

I like your insight.

Here, just add more ( maybe repeating ) comments,
1. people's behavior is semantic action, or in a web ( process as well as
culture ), a good design means we design that fits into the web, while help
people meet his needs or motivation in nice way, so
2. we should understand how the web for behavior is ( the process and
culture ) before doing the design, that's how/where the design research &
interaction design goes, and
3, if we find the web of behavior is not fit already, there leaves chance
for improvement, and here, the process design & service design goes

all is around people(either interaction design or service design), and his
context. and what now called interaction design, service design or process
design ( in some domain ), is putting a name on some long existed beings for
more awared practicing .

Cheers,
Jarod

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 10:11 PM, mark schraad <mschraad at gmail.com> wrote:

> Its easy to get into a semantic discussion here, but from the point of view
> of a business person and researcher... with a back ground in design, there
> are times when the distinction between service and product are not helpful.
> A product, after all is the physical portion of a service. I can not think
> of a product that is not really the physical tool for delivering a service.
> In a more general sense... I think it helps to think of them as offerings.
> These offerings have attributes. Calling them attributes helps us to stay
> out of the product manager mindset of calling them features. When they
> become features, the salability rather than utility becomes the focus.
>
> To directly answer your questions, yes, designers do need to think beyond
> the 'thing'. Further, I think that there is a lot of activity in developing
> both product and services that occur well before designers are typically
> involved. Those activities could be done better by incorporating methods and
> practices that design is deeply invested in. Being user centric, qualitative
> research, iterative planing, visual thinking and concept mapping to name
> just a few.
>
> When biz dev folks start to brainstorm or seed ideas, they typically start
> with a revenue model or a partnership. They are effectively beginning to
> design a product or service. Unfortunately, they are often not equipped for
> this sort of practice... well at least in my opinion. Designers can either
> make themselves available or not... but the tools I mentioned are helpful
> and add value in this stage. If designers do not bring them to the table, it
> is likely that the biz folks will eventually find and utilize them on their
> own.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 14, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Will Evans wrote:
>
> Talk to the Hand: Dan Saffer and gestural interfaces, by Andy Polaine
>> In Core77
>> http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq
>>
>> "Product designers are now service designers," argues Saffer. "We can't
>> help it. Most of the devices we're making now are part of a network, or need
>> to work with other devices, or at a minimum have a website. Our products are
>> now services."
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/ce9sbq
>>
>> So after reading the article - what do you think? Do we as interaction
>> designers need to think more seriously about service design? Our own Jeff
>> Howard did significant research about service design and posted many useful
>> articles about this here:
>> http://www.howardesign.com/exp/service/
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ will
>>
>> "Where you innovate, how you innovate,
>> and what you innovate are design problems"
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Will Evans | User Experience Architect
>> tel: +1.617.281.1281 | will at semanticfoundry.com
>> http://blog.semanticfoundry.com
>> aim: semanticwill
>> gtalk: semanticwill
>> twitter: semanticwill
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
http://designforuse.blogspot.com/

16 Feb 2009 - 12:02pm
Andy Polaine
2008

I wish I could have left Dan's second part of that quote in (or
should have). I agree with the second part more than the first part.

Designer's are *part* of service design by virtue of the fact that
we (mostly) design touchpoints and sometimes the interactions and
journeys between those touchpoints. But on that view, designers have
always been service designers even before the particular naming of
service design as a discipline happened.

I don't think that being accidentally part of a service is the same
as designing services or being a service designer. There are very
important ways of seeing design when you look at design through the
service design lens as Dan says and on that I'm in total agreement.
But I do think there are specific approaches to service design as a
discipline that are new enough and not well-known enough for there to
be value in keeping it separately defined at the moment.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38711

Syndicate content Get the feed