Comments on Explaining Water to Fish

8 Reader Comments

Back to the Column
  1. I agree with the basic point, and yes, it still needs to be trumpeted to anyone who hasn’t yet heard it. I disagree that we need to set up strawman arguments about theoretical monopolists to make the case, though.

    Amazon lists over 8,000 results for clock radios. And 13 pages of manufacturers. Surely enough choice to be going on with.

    There were three national radio, later TV networks, once (ABC was legally spun off from NBC due to monopoly concerns, in fact), but there was, and is, plenty of independent, locally owned TV and radio stations; and if you lived near the borders, Canadian stations too.

    The problem for local media is much more recent deregulation and consolidation - where previously markets had more choices, now there are fewer due to radio and TV stations simply being shut down and/or merged into large owners like Clear Channel. Newspapers face some of the same issues, in addition to their well-known revenue problems - but it’s a stretch to imply that this lack of choice was designed in from the start.

    Some of this mythology, of the uncaring corporation that offers zero choices, comes from 1950s ‘mass society’ theory - the idea that people were easily manipulated and would just go out and buy whatever they were told to, by faceless corporations and ad-men who had an interest in limiting your information; the world as Truman Show.

    Given what we now know about what motivates people - their sense of individuality, self-expression/realization and in-group social competition - this view has been strongly critiqued, in books such as The Conquest of Cool, The Rebel Sell and others.

    It doesn’t take the arrival of the Internet to realize that user experience matters. Industrial designers were doing this decades before we were born. Why are Olivetti typewriters and Braun stereos still beautiful and useful objects today? More broadly, service designers could learn a lot from Ritz-Carlton and how they empower employees to make things right for customers. There isn’t an app for that…yet. :)

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  2. The notion that “user-centered design is a transformative values system” is something I haven’t seen articulated quite as directly in recent weeks. Thank you!

    You’re right – it’s easy to critique the details of a reality that seems obvious to us. What worries me about some of the conversations I’ve heard, which aim to discard UCD or substitute it, is that they assume user-centered thinking is untouchable, and unchangeable. I’m worried that if we adopt tools that come from the non-user-friendly mentalities that birthed those tools, we might lose sight of what’s only recently become such an obvious reality.

    Anyway, this article is well timed and very on point. Thanks and I’ll definitely be sharing this around.

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  3. I agree whole-heartedly with everything here. What amazes me-even today, is that people still don’t understand why this point – that the customer is ultimately at the center of everything a business does – is so impactful.

    It truly is like trying to explain water to a fish.

    Yet fish have been swimming in water forever, and successful businesses have been working to meet customer end-goals since forever. It works. There shouldn’t be any questions about it. So why are there?

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  4. You haven’t actually addressed the issues that were raised: There are issues with UCD, and they aren’t solved by looking at it in a more abstract manner. As AJ Kandy says, people cared about users before the internet. 90% of your article is rendered incorrect by that alone.

    To the remaining 10% I’ll say this: Would your design be better if you took your users’ perspective, or used their experience, or asked them what they wanted? The answer, as many are finding out, is “maybe”.

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  5. I agree with Sunny.

    Focusing on engagement and activity is not a good measure of positive user experience or a predictor of long lasting customer loyalty. It can distract, delay and frustrate users that are attempting to accomplish tasks and are looking for efficiency. And it is not true that engagement with a service necessarily leads to engagement with the provider or their user community. When you buy a cow you aren’t buying the farm. The availability of social media doesn’t make it central to the service or the reputation of the service. There are still many products and services that make sales despite their poor quality.

    If customer loyalty, reputation, and repeat sales increased without increased user activity, life would still be good. On the other hand, if increased engagement and activity didn’t lead to more business, than who cares.

    There are too many business looking to collect meaningless “likes” or other clicks, and using metrics that ultimately do not impact their business or truly add value for their users.

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  6. “Explaining water to fish”. A few short & well-chosen title. And it is such a general concept : in the real world, as well as metaphorically… ?

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  7. Tex: I think you’re interpreting her use of engagement too specifically. I don’t think she’s using the term as marketing hucksters do. Engagement can be as simple as using a product as it was designed to do, which might only include one use.

    Copy & paste the code below to embed this comment.
  8. Sorry, commenting is closed on this article.