Task 1b > Human Centred Design

In the video “Human centred design” David Kelly introduces to the audience that the design company’s aim is to present behavioural and personality aspects in product designs. At which the aim involves human centred design, which is to create design products that may bring positive emotions and experiences to user(s) as they respond to a certain product. The interest here is that designers are attempting to optimise the user’s experience with the product. So Kelly describes an extensive attention is necessary to create a “man-machine relationship”.

The design company that Kelly worked with concentrated on human centred design at the retail store Prada in New York. Designs that will capture the experience of cultural and retail environment and experience the pleasure of services the customers will receive in the store, especially with new design technology in the shop, e.g. display digital screening of fashion clothing, changing rooms with liquid crystal wall that can be switched on/and off to allow privacy of dressing into clothes, and magic mirrors that records and plays the movement of the customer.

I believe these designs are very clever, interactive and very attractive to customers who would discover pleasurable and enjoyable experiences in the Prada store, which made it so distinct from other retailers. The designers pursued for a more enriching experience that will reward customers more than what they’ve spent in the shop. A memorable experience they will never forget and they will visit again.

Kelly commented on creating designs to be more “human”. His company project was to design personable cubicles in workplace-office, etc. the hugging wall. To have cubicles, life would be sweet… Their goal is to invent cubicles that can elevate positive working atmosphere in the office. I think this design is very nice, because working in a busy office can be stressful and dull, which may lead lower productivity levels by employees, and designing attractive cubicles makes work to be pleasant, refreshing, and productive.

Kelly did not explain the reason for designs to be more “human”. But he gave a relating examples to his philosophy. I understood it by designing things to be “human” is to design products that can express emotion and personality, and people would enjoy using products that can emulate these human behaviour. To further justify this theory, we would enjoy being with a friend, partner, acquaintance (or whatever) who has positive emotion and good personality, and not somebody who is the opposite to these (pleasant) human aspect. This idea I think can relate to Kelly’s principle, as a cubicle that is designed to be more “human” is more enjoyable to have than a designed cubicle that has dull-coloured-grey wall that may cause claustrophobia.

Another thing to note after watching the video is that designs can influence people’s behaviour, such as the case with the Pavilion Water Recycling Plant in Greenwich London. The establishment was designed in way that whoever comes near the water plant will regard the place in esteem of the calm and tranquil environment that the building presents. The elements of design of the Pavilion have influences on the behaviour of individuals, as people who visit the water plant will respect the place and they would generate minimal noise as they are attracted and intrigued to the ‘quiet and peaceful’ designs.

I believe this video is about designs that encompass the element of human behaviour, emotions and personality is a respect and progress in the design world. Designs were previously made to suit the needs and function of its use, but in this current age designs have evolved with a new principle. Designs were not just to satisfy the needs and function, but they are also to satisfy the individual’s emotion and other human characteristics as they use the product.

In Wikipedia I found this line to be relevant to the video: The chief difference from other product design philosophies is that user-centered design tries to optimize the product around how users can, want, or need to use the product, rather than forcing the users to change their behaviour to accommodate the product.

Task 1a: Video> Emotional Design

Watching Don Norman’s “Emotional Design” video has led to my discovery that a design does not need to just perform its functionality but also to have the ability to create positive emotional response by the user and create new experience(s) for the user.

As to say a design that is able to express and communicate a unique story becomes a memorable thing, because a reflective design will have the user place himself/or herself in their self-image of them using the product with personal satisfaction (this was quote from the excerpt of the video clip). So I believe a ‘good’ design must be able to engage the user in ways for the user to enjoy while using the item.

Norman quoted, “The ability to personalise will make something yours”. The keyword in that quote I focused on is ‘personalise’ which I think is important in design. A design that allows a person to personalise their bought item will make them happy as it will become part of their personal life, and so as to not just create a product to a serve its purpose but also to make it enjoyable to use.

I am always reminded in my studies that in design it should be well considered to include the package of fun, surprise element and a story-telling engagement, and that is what Norman is talking about in the video – that there must be something more beyond to the purpose, use and function of the product.

Norman was discussing about the three elements of design that should have, the visceral design, behavioural design and reflective design. A consideration for designers to take note of as visceral design gives a pleasant appearance making a design look very attractive which becomes a desirable want/or need by the user; behavioural design is the pleasure of using the design which is given by the feeling of complete control of the user’s environment; and the reflective design is something about providing self-image and personal satisfaction of using the design.

I feel that lessons shared in the video should be well noted by industrial designers because a design may not just be created to display its functionality, but to make it (very) worthwhile to have in possession and to reward personal satisfaction of owning the design.

Keywords and elements of design which I took note of:

*a design must be memorable in the user’s mind

*a design must give the ability to personalise

*a design should tell a story

*a design should be enjoyable to use

What I find critical about Norman’s view, is that he displayed great enthusiasm in designs for their fun element but not the purpose and use of the product. He tells of the mini cooper that has many faults to the design which he noted from reading reviews, but he says he still enjoys the car. At the beginning of the video, he commented on the beauty and his excitement of an object, a round-turning-wheel that swivels on a stand, at which he confessed he did not understand the function and purpose of it, but he insists that he would own one.

So the thought has come to my mind, a design that has great physical appearance and is considered beautiful, but it serves no purpose in function and use, is a good design? And that it could be important for industrial designers to focus and take note of? So a product that is not functional but is physically beautiful, is a worthwhile piece to have? Perhaps it is as people are looking for more than just function of the design.

Industrial designer may learn many elements and aspects of design from this video. By watching this they will learn what is good design and bad design. I feel this video encompass the relevant topics about design which Industrial designers should remember in their design-making.

Video: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/don_norman_on_design_and_emotion.html