Despite silly season we had a great time during my workshop on design research synthesis at the IxDA Munich meeting.

We worked in three mixed groups and we tried to visualize the synthesis process, including input/output, activities, methods and tools used, stakeholders involved, ways of “storing” findings/insights for later re-use and personal positive/negative experience during synthesis.

Here are a couple of topics that came up during the discussion:

• Is synthesis a process? Can it be formalized?
  
  Some participants mentioned that synthesis is a subjective and subconscious act that cannot be externalized or formalized. Nevertheless they suggested that synthesis can be facilitated by providing an optimal (work/analysis/synthesis)-environment e.g. stress free schedules, lots of room to interact with data and colleagues etc.
• How to collect the right amount of data?
  
  To be able to do “good synthesis” it was indicated that the initial process of data collection has to be planned carefully. Having a clear understanding of what to collect and which questions to answer helps to avoid the phenomenon of “death by data“ during synthesis. The synthesis process is perceived to be easier with less visual noise. One proposed solution was labeling data-chunks during deconstruction with a distinct icon to have a comprehensive view of all collected data, without having to read the textual information.
• How many people are involved during synthesis?
  
  While in some organizations synthesis as a process is done by one person only, there were also examples of synthesis as a collaborative activity. Often the project-scope, the available time and budget seem to influence how many people can get involved. All participants agreed that an inclusion of other researchers/designers or related-stakeholders during synthesis might be beneficial (embracing different points of view, building upon insights of others etc.)
• Should we integrate clients during synthesis?
  
  There was the suggestion that an integration of clients during research and synthesis helps to build empathy and commitment. Integration (even when it is done only partially) makes synthesis transparent to decision makers and enables them to “get“ insights (both in the sense of understanding the findings and having insights for themselves, in contrast to “being lectured” by the researcher.
• What are good deliverables of the synthesis process?
  
  The question what good deliverables look like strongly related to the discussion of when to go digital during synthesis. There was a discussion of “excel spreadsheets“ vs “post-it wall pictures“ or rephrased: when is it better rather to inspire than to inform with the output of the synthesis process? How can we adequately communicate meaning (of our insights/findings)? And is it necessary to educate our clients to realize what deliverables they really need?

Due to the time-restriction of our meeting, we could not dig any deeper. All in all, there seems to be a strong interest in the topic of design research synthesis among practitioners from various backgrounds. We agreed to bring up the topic in one of our future meetings and we may also consider collecting best practices, and design synthesis theory in a Wiki or a more formal form of publication. We were not sure though, whether it is possible to mold such an abstract activity as synthesis into a paper-based representation. Only time will tell.

If you are interested in collaboration on analysis/synthesis, feel free to drop me a line.

Cheers to all participants for making this event so enjoyable. A big thanks to the IxDA Munich organizers for enabling all this and ¡muchas gracias! to IDEO for making the office space available (once again).

Slides from the workshop:

Creativity and Rapid Prototyping at its best.

It was interesting to observe how many people instantly tried to photograph these two young artists by using their mobile phones. Look at the cyclist on the right. Drive-by-shooting. Yes, I confess myself guilty, although in my case I used my trusty DSLR at hand.

In the youtube-decade the time-to-market (actually time-to-user) has decreased tremendously. The delay from artistic performance to internet-hero-for-five-minutes is only limited by the amount of time it takes to name, tag and upload the material.

Where are we going with our always-on culture? What is the next step? Online-streaming of video-recordings with mobile phones? Eventually we’re there already. Think some decades ahead: How about brain-implants directly hooking into our visual cortex? No need to handle/carry a phone.

Scary?

Ever since reading Don Norman’s classic “the design of everyday things” forcing functions became one of my favorite topics. I always keep a sharp lookout for them.

In the example above you can see the thermostat of a typical German shower. By default the maximum adjustable temperature is 38° Celsius (100 F). That’s hot enough to soften the hardest dried-up dirt but it still feels comfortable to shower. If you want to go for the extra boost of heat, say after a winters night out in the cold, you have to push the red button to be able to rotate the thermostat beyond the 38°C limitation.

I guess the forcing function was implemented to save you from accidently burning your skin. It can happen easily. You know what I mean. Take for example those awkward moments at the beginning of your bathing experience, when you wait for the water to get hot and then all of a sudden it does get hot – hard-boiled eggs hot. Traveling a lot lately gave me insights into the scientific world of adjusting water temperature: an interesting topic indeed, given the multitude of influencing factors like handle design, thermostat placement, clockwise/anti-clockwise rotation, different water pressure of hot/cold water pipes, delay of temperature change etc.

But in the above example: once again saved by the simple pleasure of thoughtful design.

What is your favorite forcing function?

Tomorrow Monday (July 26th) I will be hosting a workshop on design research synthesis during the Interaction Design Association meeting at IDEO Munich.

See the official announcement on IxDA Munich or Linkedin. Slides of the presentation will be available here after the workshop.

Drop by if you’re around. The more the merrier.

You really shouldn’t park here.

The extent to which it is desireable to have scars as reminders.

For interactive digital products animations/transitions are a core element forming the user experience. Nature got it’s own way of animating transitions, when the change of season is accompanied by elements slowly changing their aggregate state.

Always remember: If you panic, don’t panic.

Can surfaces communicate meaning, tell stories or evoke feelings?

How about personalized surfaces? How can surfaces influence the perception and interaction with an object/interface/area?

I find the topic of surfaces and their affordances and effects increasingly interesting.

The mysteries of package design. It is impossible to read the instructions on the back of the bottle, without constantly turning it around. Bad packaging design + information overload = unsatisfied customer.