Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Committees, creativity and design
On BBC Radio 4 this morning, there was a debate about the demerits of committees - they take lots of time, they abdicate responsibility, and, most interestingly, they provide strong social pressure to conform. This, it was argued, stifles creativity. Whilst disputed by the other debater, there is certainly some truth in this, and it touches on some of the bigger issues that are interesting me at the moment, realting to design, creativity and users.
Ferrari's are passionate, sexy, fast cars, crafted through a single design ethos. Fiesta's are functional, practical cars crafted by committees and focus groups. Both have their adherents; to pose in, the Ferrari wins, to go down the shops, the Fiesta. To use in general? It depends, but I know which I'd choose. But with software, we always design it by committee (user-centered design, it's called, but it has the effect of knocking off the rough edges). Should it, though? Or should we have passionate, quirky, fantastically stylish software to make our user experiences much more enjoyable (even if they are slightly less practical?).
On BBC Radio 4 this morning, there was a debate about the demerits of committees - they take lots of time, they abdicate responsibility, and, most interestingly, they provide strong social pressure to conform. This, it was argued, stifles creativity. Whilst disputed by the other debater, there is certainly some truth in this, and it touches on some of the bigger issues that are interesting me at the moment, realting to design, creativity and users.
Ferrari's are passionate, sexy, fast cars, crafted through a single design ethos. Fiesta's are functional, practical cars crafted by committees and focus groups. Both have their adherents; to pose in, the Ferrari wins, to go down the shops, the Fiesta. To use in general? It depends, but I know which I'd choose. But with software, we always design it by committee (user-centered design, it's called, but it has the effect of knocking off the rough edges). Should it, though? Or should we have passionate, quirky, fantastically stylish software to make our user experiences much more enjoyable (even if they are slightly less practical?).
Comments:
Post a Comment
(c) 2003-2005 Russell Beale
Atom
RSS