Waterfall Bad, Washing Machine Good?
I just came across this well-received post and presentation by Leisa Reichelt, who is a User Experience Consultant (someone who creates customer experiences that are both pleasurable and effective).She's an advocate of a non-linear, user-centred approach to design and build of anything from a retail space or a phone call, to a website.
She's posted a presentation which explains the pros of the washing machine approach (an iterative design process) versus the cons of a traditional 'waterfall' approach (used often in advertising, broadcasting, and much corporate e-learning solutions) where the design and build cycle follow a strict and linear process of
SCOPE
DESIGN
BUILD
TEST
Although I'm not convinced by the washing machine metaphor*, the presentation is worth a watch for an compare/contrast between the two design styles.
*in my experience, you open a washing machine, put stuff in, click on and leave it until it's finished...not much scope for opening it halfway and adding another pair of jeans or switching cycles...
Labels: iterative design, user-centred design, washing machine good, waterfall bad
posted by Michelle Gallen at
10:04 AM
5 Comments:
It's more usually called the "spiral model" in Software Development.
Boehms original paper is here
But there things have moved on too.
Agile Development is a family of methods.
Go raibh maith agat for the links. I have to admit that the misgivings I feel about client and user involvement in the design/development process is that you really need clients and users who can add value to the process, and who are willing to take direction when necessary.
Iterative design processes can get bogged down in personal opinion or uninformed 'creativity'...it's a great design model, and when it works, it works fantastically well - everyone involved on the project can feel a sense of achievement.
But it's also more vulnerable to complete collapse. I guess that's the usual risk-reward return!
hey Michelle - thanks for the link! a couple of comments:
I called it the washing machine approach after a diagram I've seen used to describe the process that looks like a washing machine in process!
Iterative design processes should be informed by user research.
Founding design decisions on user research means that they processes *don't* get bogged down in personal opinion or uninformed 'creativity' as you've suggested.
With out the research insight, from actual observational studies of end users, any iterative methodology breaks down.
With user research, you'll tend to find much faster and smarter design decisions being made.
:)
Also, if the user is paying for what is being built, that will tend to brake "uninformed creativity"
He who pays the programmer calls the code....
How does using user research in the design process differ to the user-centred design process?
In user-centred design I've seen learning content produced where the target audience (children) were given a big role in deciding how things were made. In some instances this worked really well...in others some terrible decisions were made (what entertains one group of 10 year olds for 5 minutes in a brainstorming session will not necessarily entertain the majority of 10 year olds in practice).
As for cost ensuring a quick and efficient design process, I guess that depends on what type of budget is being spent. In my experience, public sector budgets are spent and accounted for quite differently to commercial budgets!
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home