Balanced presentation by Axel Unger of IDEO Munich, on design process and its potential role in healthcare innovation. Gives a well-reasoned explanation of the processes user-centred designers use and encourages people commissioning design to 'design everything' i.e. think not just of the product but the context in which it's embedded (in service design speak 'the touch points'). I can't emphasise the importance of this enough. It also shows how IDEO involves end-users in design i.e. giving tools and supporting idea development, without making wild claims for participation and co-creation. Refreshing.
The talk includes PR videos of IDEO's work both with Mayo and Kaiser, both strong on user involvement and participation. Doctors from Mayo explaining that it's not the just the medical technology that's critical, but how it's implemented (pace the references to left and right brain!), and the Kaiser case study shows a participatory project to develop better processes for hand-overs including checklists and structured communication between medics and between medics and patients. IDEO claim that the Kaiser work has reduced both errors and the time nurses need to spend communicating with patients, and results in happier patients.
Showing posts with label ROI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ROI. Show all posts
06 October 2010
10 June 2010
Don Norman (again) and incremental innovation
Don Norman at IIT Design Research Conference 2010 from IIT Institute of Design on Vimeo.
Don Norman is still working through the relationship between design research and innovation and has reached some clarity on the difference between invention (or radical innovation, as Norman calls it) and incremental innovation (which is where user centred design fits). With some helpful insights from Roberto Verganti he now has a characterisation of design research and innovation that fits together, notwithstanding a few quips about 'design thinking' along the way.[via Harry Brignull]
11 January 2010
Non- (dis-?) integrated transport information
Overheard on a London to Bristol train this afternoon...
Passenger: Can you tell me what time I can use this off-peak ticket to come back tomorrow morning?
Train guard: I'll have to look it up for you. [Reaches for timetable book.]
Passenger: Oh, I thought it would be after 8.30.
Train guard: No, it's different times depending on where you are in the country. [Long pause.] There you are it's 8.15. You can use this ticket any time after that. There's one at 8.20.
Passenger: Thanks. It doesn't tell you that when you buy the ticket. It would help if it did.
There are so many pinch points on journeys on the UK rail network where just a little responsiveness could improve user experience. I checked whether the information the passenger needed could be found on the web, even if not at the ticket machine (one might argue that too much information could delay the ticket vending process). I couldn't find it on National Rail Enquiries' web site, either. Nor could National Rail's virtual assistant, Lisa, come to my aid. But the information was there, in the guard's timetable. So it could be made available, at the right time, in the right way, to passengers.
The exchange between guard and passenger lasted several minutes, delaying the guard in his progress down the train checking tickets. Good user experience not only creates confidence in a service, it also makes business sense.
Passenger: Can you tell me what time I can use this off-peak ticket to come back tomorrow morning?
Train guard: I'll have to look it up for you. [Reaches for timetable book.]
Passenger: Oh, I thought it would be after 8.30.
Train guard: No, it's different times depending on where you are in the country. [Long pause.] There you are it's 8.15. You can use this ticket any time after that. There's one at 8.20.
Passenger: Thanks. It doesn't tell you that when you buy the ticket. It would help if it did.
There are so many pinch points on journeys on the UK rail network where just a little responsiveness could improve user experience. I checked whether the information the passenger needed could be found on the web, even if not at the ticket machine (one might argue that too much information could delay the ticket vending process). I couldn't find it on National Rail Enquiries' web site, either. Nor could National Rail's virtual assistant, Lisa, come to my aid. But the information was there, in the guard's timetable. So it could be made available, at the right time, in the right way, to passengers.
The exchange between guard and passenger lasted several minutes, delaying the guard in his progress down the train checking tickets. Good user experience not only creates confidence in a service, it also makes business sense.
16 January 2009
Various on social networking
Pew Research have reported that, despite the focus on young people's use of SN sites, more US adults than young people have a profile on SN sites. Having a profile doesn't say much, though, and active use still remains the preserve of young adults (18-24s). Pew report that social use of SN is more prevalent than professional use and that those using SN professionally maintain separate identities to avoid cross-over between personal and work domains.
IBM have published a summary of research analysing work-based use of SN, having tracked employees' use of their internal tool, Beehive. The tool was provided without restrictions on the information shared and they found people exchanging both personal and professional information. In contrast to personal SNs (such as Facebook) they found that IBMers used Beehive, not just to network with people they knew but also to connect to people they didn't know, to gain support for projects and ideas and advance their careers. They found positive outcomes for individuals who were using Beehive extensively, e.g. greater social capital, commitment to the company, access to expertise etc. (for me it's hard to see whether these resulted from or contributed to extensive use).
Bill Ives has commented on the IBM research, particularly on the finding that within the protected environment of an organisation, people use SN to connect to people they don't know and that there are gains in social capital for individuals who make those connections. Ives comments that he can see how these connections might be important in a large consulting organisation such as IBM but that the reported gains from SN now need to be linked to business outcomes to show return on investment
Very nice post by Penny Edwards, also stemming from the IBM report, pointing out that the benefits of SN in organisations depend on how it is implemented i.e. integration with existing tools, reflecting people's personal preferences for communicating their networked identity, rewarding with more value than simply 'who is connected with who.'
IBM have published a summary of research analysing work-based use of SN, having tracked employees' use of their internal tool, Beehive. The tool was provided without restrictions on the information shared and they found people exchanging both personal and professional information. In contrast to personal SNs (such as Facebook) they found that IBMers used Beehive, not just to network with people they knew but also to connect to people they didn't know, to gain support for projects and ideas and advance their careers. They found positive outcomes for individuals who were using Beehive extensively, e.g. greater social capital, commitment to the company, access to expertise etc. (for me it's hard to see whether these resulted from or contributed to extensive use).
Bill Ives has commented on the IBM research, particularly on the finding that within the protected environment of an organisation, people use SN to connect to people they don't know and that there are gains in social capital for individuals who make those connections. Ives comments that he can see how these connections might be important in a large consulting organisation such as IBM but that the reported gains from SN now need to be linked to business outcomes to show return on investment
Very nice post by Penny Edwards, also stemming from the IBM report, pointing out that the benefits of SN in organisations depend on how it is implemented i.e. integration with existing tools, reflecting people's personal preferences for communicating their networked identity, rewarding with more value than simply 'who is connected with who.'
05 June 2008
ROI from user-focus
Yet more data on the revenue lost from return of fault-free consumer electronics goods. This time from Accenture, who estimate the cost to the US CE industry in 2007 was $17 billion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
