Why “letting go” is hard in experience design

Bob and Alice enter the restaurant and survey the scene. It is not their first time, and yet, they struggle to contain their excitement as their eyes dart across the mountains of food. Alice tests the elastic in her stretch pants and takes a moment to congratulate herself on her clothing choice. The waiter shows them to their table, and they order drinks. The eating games are about to begin.

We are all guilty of having had too many helpings at an all-you-can-eat restaurant. We upsize to the grande latte when the tall would have done, and we rationalize that the jumbo fries are better value. What we less often consider, however, is the impact of this “buffet effect” on the maintainability of software.

A few days after their buffet indulgence, Alice and Bob resume their normal lives as software engineers. Although they have both shed their stretch pants, they return to work with an unchanged psychology. The same subconscious thought processes that led Alice and Bob to overeat make them reluctant to retire old product features.

Microsoft Word, Google Docs, and even our own TinyMCE, all carry the scars of product maturity in the form of super-sized feature sets. Even products that are new and have minimalism as a core value are prone to suffer from the same affliction: Medium delivered a minimalist, paradigm-changing content creation interface. The initial release showed discipline in the feature set but is starting to bloat over time, with the introduction of more layout options and writing features. It appears that our human condition fools us into creating software that is less maintainable over time.

Our inability to let go of things, even things that we no longer need, is a fascinating topic explored by psychologist and behavioral economist Dan Ariely. According to Ariely, the buffet phenomenon occurs due to two patterns of human logic.

First, we fall in love with what we already have. This love manifests in software as a high rate of feature retention. Sadly, inside most software products, there is little correlation between a feature’s utility and its persistence.

Secondly, we focus on what we may lose, rather than what we may gain. When we include a feature in a product, the thought that we might cut it from a future release creates a sense of loss. Removing a capability represents a loss that is seldom weighed against the benefits of a smaller, more maintainable code base.

The trend in content creation is towards clean, well-designed and minimalistic interfaces. Stripping away extraneous features enables authors to focus on the task of content creation, freeing themselves from distraction and overhead. Minimal features and more maintainable code bases are significant benefits, yet, like well-fed humans at an all you can eat buffet, our attachment to features-past leads us to bloat our software in the name of flexibility.

This post was first published on the Ephox.com blog

Bahrain leads the way with inaugural Airports Arabia Conference

By Dan Wong, Assistant Professor, Aviation Management Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

In IATA’s recent March 2015 Air Passenger Market Analysis, the Middle East region was reported to continue experiencing strong growth in terms of both international and domestic air travel in terms of both Revenue-Passenger-Kilometers (RPK) and Available-Seat-Kilometers (ASK) above industry norms for the one-year period from March 2014 to 2015. The geographic location of the major hub airports in the Middle East to destinations in Africa, Asia and Europe, combined with increased air travel demand within the Middle East, will continue to make the Middle East a thriving airline marketplace in the foreseeable future.

As the airlines within the Middle East continue to build up their aircraft fleets to meet projected air travel demands, airport operators throughout the Middle East are also having to contend with issues in conjunction with developing sufficient airport infrastructure to accommodate the increases in both air passenger volumes and aircraft traffic both now and into the future. In light of these challenges faced by Middle East airport operators, while also embracing the desire to improve the air passenger’s travel experience, the Bahrain Society of Engineers, in association with the Federation of Arab Engineers, convened the first Airports Arabia Conference in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

In addition to my paper on The Integration of Governance into Airport Terminal Designs Supporting Ground Transportation Services, over 20 papers from academics, airport executives and aviation industry professionals from around the world were presented to the 170+ delegates in attendance on various aspects of airport development. A panel discussion was integrated into the program on the challenges facing airport development projects. Significant discussions and networking opportunities also ensued during the many coffee breaks and meals among all of the attendees regarding airport development issues.

Many of those attending believed that both the subject matter and the particular venue of the conference was a long time coming given the challenges Middle East airport operators are facing in light of the increasing importance of civil aviation to the economic development and growth of the region, as well as the sheer increase in the numbers of air passengers and aircraft traffic both currently experienced and projected to experience in the near future. I believe that more conferences in the Middle East region are needed allowing for more fruitful conversations between academics, airport operators and aviation industry professionals to better facilitate the current and future aviation infrastructure needs in the Middle East. Given the increasing interconnectivity of much of the world by way of the Middle East, the impacts of these exchanges may very well influence the future of air travel for a significant percentage of the world’s population for years to come

About Dan
Dr. Dan Wong is currently an Assistant Professor of Aviation Management at Prince Sultan University. Originally born and raised in Northeastern Iowa, Dan was conferred a PhD for his pioneering research work in airport planning from Queensland University of Technology. He has since been a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Aviation at the University of Central Missouri prior to his current position in Saudi Arabia. Dan is well known for traveling the world looking for adventure, knowledge and life experiences with his wife, Donna, and their large Maine Coon cat. Dan can be reached by e-mail at: dwong@psu.edu.sa.

On destinations and gratitude

Street Art by Scampi, New Zealand | http://www.streetartutopia.com

I have reached the end of the academic endurance event that I have been pursuing for the last 3+ years at QUT, Australia. Although the race was mine, there were a number of amazing people that I met along the way who helped me at pivotal times during this research.

If we shared a conversation at a conference in the last three years, exchanged ideas via email, had a chat walking the corridors of an airport terminal, or connected in any way, please accept my sincere thanks… I have learned, been inspired and discovered my passion. I look forward to continuing to share research and lessons about how to create meaningful and profitable experiences – both in, and out, of the airport – right here at inPlaneTerms.

…There are, however, a number of exceptional persons who have had a direct influence on the direction and quality of this research. My supervisory team at QUT’s School of Design, Prof Vesna Popovic and Dr Ben Kraal, have been unshakeable in their support since the start of my PhD journey. Their high standards and integrity, and weekly doses of inspiration were instrumental to the completion of this work and the ultimate form that it took. Thanks also to Dr Tristan Kleinschmidt, who was part of the supervisory team in the early phase of this journey.
The learning curve associated with the aviation industry is extremely steep. I am very much indebted to the generosity of the following industry experts who helped to flatten the gradient of this curve: Steve Tarbuck (CPH), Pawel Kolatorski (ZRH), Kiyoshi Goto (KIX), Kickie Hiller and Lars Forssell (ARN), Sek Min Foo (SIN), Teresa Motley (LAS), Shreemen Prabhakaran (DXB) and Geoff Hehir (BVN Architects). In particular, I am grateful for their hospitality, frank insights and shared passion for innovation and unorthodox thinking.
The data collection for this research was made possible through a joint ARC research project (LP0990135). Thanks to the collaboration of the partners, I was able to call Brisbane International Airport my working laboratory for over a year. In particular, thank you to Kelly Wilkes, Dennis Krause and Adrian Bannister from Brisbane Airport Corporation for their help and insightful feedback. Thanks are also due to the 199 participants who shared their stories and airport experiences with me.

Anna Harrison, Principles of Experience Design in Airport Terminals

Reducing anxiety for travellers: Schiphol’s Sherlock

A brilliantly fun solution to the problem of “lost items” at Schiphol Airport. Short video on YouTube.

Design’s Mid-Life Crisis

The real value of Design training transcends the ability to incrementally refine the shape of staplers, orange juicers and the myriad of objects owned by the world’s “10%”

This week, I have been at the Design Research Society’s 2014 conference in Umeå, Sweden. There were some outstanding presentations from an international audience “pushing the boundaries of design and design research”. On an individual scale, there is no question that amazing and interesting work is being done in the field of Design: Dog & Bone; Experience Design; The Chef as Designer; Airport Security Screening; Designing Medical Jewellery; Architectural Usability; Airline Passenger Comfort to mention a few. On a collective scale, however, I leave DRS2014 with the feeling that Design as a field is trapped in a struggle to articulate its own value. Questions of whether “Service” Design is more important than “Industrial” Design appear to miss the point completely. Why are we asking these questions at all?

It is generally acknowledged that as complexity in the world increases, there is a need for collaboration in order to create solutions to problems. Put in a different way: no one individual Designer can hope to have the skills needed to solve the problems that we are confronted with in society today. An excellent example of this was provided in the opening debate at DRS2014 – unfortunately, the elephant that remained in the room was that in order to “design” solutions in a field like synthetic biology, there is a necessary amount of domain knowledge that the design team must possess. It is naïve to think that design skills alone can lead to thoughtful solutions amidst such complexity. It is critical to work with people from different Design and other disciplines. Questioning which of these fields or professions is more important than the other is meaningless and smacks of insecurity.

Rather than continuing conversations that showcase this insecurity and demonstrate a lack of conviction (“Please don’t tweet what the speakers say as they don’t believe their own words”. Really??) perhaps we collectively should focus on articulating the value that Design training brings to developing solutions to complex world problems.

To be useful in the future, ‪#design needs to learn to articulate its value ‪#drs2014 Twitter

Let’s replace the “fake debates” with authentic conversations. Let’s stop cowering in the shadows of our own opinions. Let’s recognize that collectively, as Designers, we are trained to listen, hear, empathise and understand, think laterally, communicate effectively and have the courage to work with others to create solutions to world problems. The real value of Design training transcends the ability to incrementally refine the shape of staplers, orange juicers and the myriad of objects owned by the world’s “10%”. The real value of Design training lies in its contribution towards solving challenging and complex problems.

The next international Design conference will be hosted in Brisbane in November next year. Will we have the confidence to venture outside the status quo and address Design’s mid-life crisis?

 

Head Fake: Focus on the Passenger, not the Profits

For the last three months, I have been 4 weeks away from finishing my thesis on the Principles of Experience Design for Airport Terminals. I am now fitter than I ever have been, have watched every rom-com produced in the last decade, and until today, I have been stuck in what felt like an infinite writing vortex (or perhaps pit). Two weeks ago, I was ready to throw it all in… luckily (for me, if not the universe :-)), I somehow pushed on and today completed a significant milestone.

In the process of coercing 100,000 words to take their rightful place on 238 pages of manuscript, I discovered that the work I have produced is a head fake, in the late Randy Pausch spirit of the term:

…and it’s the first example of what I’m going to call a head fake… we actually don’t want our kids to learn football… we send our kids out to learn much more important things: teamwork, sportsmanship, perseverance…

Dr. Randy Pausch, The Last Lecture

The research I undertook began as an exploration of the factors of influence of passenger experience. By taking a passenger oriented perspective, based on the principles of design thinking, the research uncovered three key findings (i) a paradox in the Level of Service metrics which limits their use in the evaluation of service quality, (ii) four distinct modes of engagement between the passenger and the airport environment, and (iii) six principles for experience design in passenger terminals.

Although the goals of the research were to gain a deeper understanding of how passengers relate to their time in the airport, in the end, what was uncovered was a way to not only improve the passenger experience, but also the returns on passenger footprint invested (by optimizing the allocation of space in the terminal building).

By inverting the way that terminal design is approached and beginning the process with a solid understanding of passenger needs and desires, strategies to increase the returns were identified. The head fake, is of course, that the research focused on the passenger, not the profits.

Sources: A Harrison, Principles of Experience Design for Airport Terminals, PhD Thesis, June 2014; R McGrath, Transient Advantage; T Brown, Design Thinking.

The magic of travel (is still real)

…much of the glamour and innocent excitement of air travel has been lost in the march toward lower fares and greater security…
Rust, Flying Across America, 2007

I think these two ladies just blew Rust’s theory out of the water. An & Ria’s #First flight #PaxEx #Magic

 

 

 

A degree alone does not guarantee career success

Image from Daily Mail UK

 …in order to succeed in life post degree, a scholar needs a much broader range of skills…

Today, the acquisition of a degree, even a higher degree such as a Masters or Doctorate, is no longer enough to guarantee career success. In fact, according to many recent media accounts, pursuing a higher degree has been cast as a waste of time.

As a society, we collectively benefit from the investment made by each scholar in pursuing an education. Education has been, and always will be, the key weapon that we have against prejudice, ignorance, hatred and war.  Unfortunately, the global trend is towards reducing, rather than increasing, the amount of higher education pursued by each individual.

A major cause for the decreasing popularity of higher education is the perceived negative return on the time and cost of such degrees. Potential scholars feel that after completing their degree, they will emerge without the skills required to guarantee career success. For the most part, they are correct.

Historically, education institutions have been in the market of teaching scholars a specific set of skills. The range of skills taught actually decreases as the rank of the degree increases. In order to complete a Doctorate, for example, scholars are trained to attain world-class competency in a (necessarily) narrow skill set. The issue is, of course, than in order to succeed in life post degree, a scholar needs a much broader range of skills. Unfortunately, the teaching of these broader skills lies outside of the curriculum of most tertiary institutions.

In response to this need, I launched a new eBook (and tries of workshops) late last year. You can find more info about the project here: FromScholarToDollar.com. The book is free for personal use… if you enjoy it, please share it 🙂

 

 

 

The airport retail trap

As cost pressures grip airlines, the way into wallets is via longer wait times and the allure of high-end shops, fine dining and exclusive lounge clubs…

According to Anna Harrison, “In the near future, most passengers will be air-travel natives…The inexperienced, novice traveller will become a creature relegated to the pages of human history.”

“Air-travel natives will be increasingly interested in efficient passage through the passenger terminal. As passengers gain proficiency, they will become less and less tolerant of queuing and waiting. Air-travel natives will be decreasingly interested in engaging in the airport experience offerings.”

For airports, the risk is over-investing in retail.

Humans won’t let their hours be fodder for airport bottom lines for ever. Peak dwell time may not be far away.

Extract from Your time and money: the airport retail trap by Jason Murphy

Guest experience lessons from paradise

This week marks the end of our Australian summer, as demarcated by the end of one school year and the start of another. Before settling in to the more regular rhythm of life between summers, I’m going to start 2014 with informal reflections on my experience as a guest in paradise…

For me, the summer was bookended by what I assumed would be two very similar experiences: a dive trip to Heron Island and another to Lady Elliot Island. The two islands are located at the southernmost end of the Great Barrier Reef. Both islands are entirely made of coral, surrounded by never-ending horizons of every shade of blue, and home to some of the most spectacular marine life on the planet. The islands offer “basic” accommodations – the real hero of the vacation is the diving and snorkelling. Despite the luxury price tag, it is rare to find guests who are disappointed at the lack of fine thread Egyptian cottons or other creature comforts.

In spite of the similarities between the islands, my reflective experience of the two resorts is completely different. As I contemplate the potential reasons for the differences, I am drawn to one main factor: experiential inconsistency. For me, and judging from the conversations with other guests (an occupational hazard for an experience researcher!), it appears that inconsistencies in the “intimacy” with which guest touchpoints are delivered can adversely affect guest satisfaction.

As a first example, consider the first island touchpoint: the guest welcome. On one island, guests are greeted by staff and welcomed with cocktails at the common room overlooking a pristine lagoon of crystal clear water. The staff provide a basic brief of the island (snorkel safely, take care not to damage the reef), and show guests to their rooms. The process is friendly and efficient, but not overly intimate. On the second island, guests are greeted by the dazzling captain of the island (think fantasy island), and led to a common room that brings back distant memories of high school refectories. In this largely unromantic setting, guests are served a cocktail and forced to sign a legal disclaimer (snorkel safely, take care not to damage the reef). The starkness of the formal act of signing legal documents, when contrasted with the very intimate captain’s greeting presents as a experiential contradiction: …why am I signing disclaimers on fantasy island?

The above example is representative of a host of such experiential inconsistencies at the two resorts. The interesting thing to note is that although the resort facilities are not the reason for guests choosing the island, they are ultimately the source of all dissatisfaction for guests. More specifically, it is not the facilities themselves, but rather inconsistencies in the workflows associated with guest processing that provide the major source of guest angst.

Bearing in mind that these observations are based on my personal reflections and informal chats with guests at the two resorts, it appears that the introduction of a more consistent set of guest workflows would greatly improve the guest experience at both islands. As a start…

• Provide a consistent level of “intimacy” as this sets the scene for guest expectations. For example, a personal captain’s welcome suggest a more intimate and informal setting… charging the guest for hot water to make tea in the dining room, or making them sign legal disclaimers sends an inconsistent and confusing message.
• Ensure the “basic” level of service is adequate. For example, although guests do not expect the Taj Mahal, a holiday priced at the luxury end of the market implicitly suggests a base level of services such as clean dishes in the buffet stack, shampoo and conditioner in the bathroom and tea and coffee facilities which are “free” (in the context of an all-inclusive holiday).
• Empower guests to do what makes them happy. For the types of people who holiday at these resorts, their key focus is the dive. However, what elevates the dive experience is the ability to share the adventures with others. Interestingly, neither resort made it easy for divers to share their stories and GoPro footage with other guests. This is a simple thing to implement, and one that would have significant impact on guest satisfaction.
• Ensure that the physical layout reflects the resort’s business model. For example, at one of the islands there is a physical separation between the dining options that are included in the daily rate, versus those that are extra. This physical separation clearly sets guest expectations: when they are in the dining room, everything is included in their daily rate; when they are at the bar the bill is charged to their room.
• Consider the guest experience on bad weather days. The only certainty when it comes to weather is that there will be days when the weather is not conducive to diving. It is important to consider the guest workflows on days like this too: can the guests relax in a common area that affords them a view of the wild weather over the lagoon? Is the common area conducive to guests sharing stories? This is particularly important in the context of day-trippers who are unlucky enough to arrive in sub-optimal weather conditions.
• Ensure that the experience on sites like Tripadvisor is consistent with the resort’s vibe. As an example, a quick review of recent responses from the “Management” of both resorts presents a very formal and corporate tone. This corporate tone is quite disconnected from the ambiance on the islands, and quite likely accounts for some of the mis-aligned expectations that guests report in their port-trip reviews. Setting the right tone when responding to guest reviews is a missed opportunity to impact future guest satisfaction.

The above workflow corrections can all be achieved without any major capital expenditure investment… these are short term “cherry pickings” that could significantly impact the guest experience (which of course, will directly impact future business). On a personal level, it would be great if these workflow issues were resolved before the next Australian summer rolls around… as I would much rather not choose between the two islands 🙂

Sources: this post is based on my personal experiences at Heron Island (December 2013) and Lady Elliot Island (January 2014), and also on informal conversations with guests during my stay. The travel was privately funded. The theory behind guest (passenger) expectations is based on my PhD work in the area (Principles of Experience Design), to be published June 2014.