5 levels of ux strategy
TRANSCRIPT
2
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
David Juhlin
www.DavidJuhlin.com
3
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Strategy and tactics
CEO
“We are the low cost airline”
“We need to keep expenses down”
CMO
VP of marketing
“We need to generate word of mouth marketing”
Director of Marketing
“We need to create a great user experience”
Marketing Manager
“We need to understand our customers”
4
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Levels of UX strategy
Global
UX Division
Company
Industry
Project
Global
6
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Industry analysis- Porters 5 Forces
New entrances
Substitutes
Suppliers BuyersRivals/Competitors
Source: https://hbr.org/2008/01/the-five-competitive-forces-that-shape-strategy
Industry
8
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Cost or differentiation strategy
Cost Differentiation
Broa
d M
arke
tFo
cuse
d M
arke
t
BMW
Ferrari
Hyundai
Smart car
Source: “Competitive Advantage” by Michael E. Porter
9
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Southwest Vs. traditional airline
Price
Meals
lounges
Traditional airline
Seati
ng choice
s
Hub connecti
vity
Speed
Frequent d
epartures
Factors of competition
Offerings
Friendly s
ervice
User Exp
erience
Southwest
Source: https://hbr.org/2002/06/charting-your-companys-future
10
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Price premium of CX/UX
Source: The Price Premium Of Customer Experience, Forrester Research, September 4, 2015
11
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Industry CX Dynamics
Source: Customer Experiences Drives Revenue Growth 2016, Forrester Research, June 21, 2016
12
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Importance of CX/UX
Source: Customer Experiences Drives Revenue Growth 2016, Forrester Research, June 21, 2016
Company
14
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Contract out Vs. building up internally
Contract
Contract
In-house
In-house
Backend
Frontend
Online retailSearch engine
Parking fine Off-shore dev.
15
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
UX organizational structure & SWOT analysis
Fully Centralized Centralized with assignments
Matrixed (BU funded)
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Centralized funding and reporting
Standards, governance
Company-wide UX vision
Shared expertise
If BUs hire UX outside central org, competition arises
Cross-product insights/innovation
Career progression
More work to align with BUs
May work in isolation
Standards, governance
Career progressionDomain expertise
Governance takes more workBUs may lose resources if priorities shift
Company-wide UX vision
Cross-product insights/innovation
If BUs hire UX outside central org, competition arises
Works well with agile/scrumPerformance tied to product successDomain expertise
Governance is difficultLittle cross-product collaboration
Within-product innovation
Efficient product time-to-market
Fewer career growth opportunitiesBU priorities may win out over UX’s user advocacyCan’t reallocate resources if priorities shift
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Centralized funding and reporting,: A central team assigns resources to BUs
BU funds resources, who are centrally managed (matrixed org); solid & dotted-lines
Source: Nancy Dickinson & Christian Rohrer
16
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com16
Full Hybrid/Federation Fully Distributed
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Central group and BU groups, reporting separately into central leadership and BUs, respectively (no dotted lines) Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Embedded UX teams in BUs. No central org
Shared & domain expertise
Permits cross-product insights and in-depth product innovation
Governance is difficultCompetition between central and BU UX orgs may arise
Works well with agile/scrum
Efficient product time-to-market
Lack of cohesion between groups may mean less influence over company-wide UX
Lack of cohesion between groups may mean less influence over company-wide UX
No possibility for standards/governance
Domain expertise
Works well with agile/scrum
Very few career growth/devel oppys
Efficient product time-to-market
UX organizational structure & SWOT analysis
Source: Nancy Dickinson & Christian Rohrer
17
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Comparison of UX organizational structures
17
Fully Centralized Centralized with assignments
Matrixed (BU Funded) Full Hybrid/Federation
Fully distributed
Description Funding and UX reporting are
centralized
Central UX group assigns resources to
Bus. All central funding.
BU-funded teams report into central UX or BU with dotted line to the
other.
Central team and BU-funded teams. No
dotted line reporting.
BU-funded teams only. No central UX
org.
Permits global UX strategy/vision ● ● ◐ ○ ○Permits standards development and governance ● ● ◐ ○ ○Fosters domain knowledge ○ ◐ ● ● ●Works well with agile/scrum ○ ◐ ● ● ●Can shift resources quickly ● ● ○ ○ ○Provides career devel/growth ● ● ◐ ◐ ○Ensures alignment with BU/product priorities ○ ○ ● ● ●
Source: Nancy Dickinson & Christian Rohrer
18
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Mixed/Matrixed structure
CentralizedDistributed
• Specialized competency• Host specific functionalities• Drive innovation• Educate (organization & UX staff)• Assist during peaks
• Domain expertise• Great for agile• UX influence start to finish
19
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Mixed/Matrixed structure
External
• Peak load• Outside perspective
CentralizedDistributed
• Specialized competency• Host specific functionalities• Drive innovation• Educate (organization & UX staff)• Assist during peaks
• Domain expertise• Great for agile• UX influence start to finish
UX Division
21
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Inside-out and outside-in
Global
UX Division
Company
Industry
Project
Outside-in
Inside-out
22
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
The “Great” Vs. “Good Enough” Experience
Best
Average
Worst
Great (Industry leader)• Higher customer satisfaction• Higher costs
Good enough• Reasonable customer satisfaction• Low costs
23
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
CX/UX Potential
Source: The Revenue Impact Of Customer Experience, Forrester Research, August 11, 2015
24
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Strategy – UX Division
AgileWaste
Cost
Current state
Innovation
Validati
on/gate ke
eper
Knowledge sh
aring
Work fluctu
ations
Offerings
Work acro
ss products
Worldwide desig
n
Desired state
High
Low
25
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Capabilities analysis
Staff
EquipmentUsers
Processes
26
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Process analysis – “good enough” UX
Competitor A
Competitor B
Competitor C
Design A
Design B
Design C Design D
27
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Process analysis – “innovation” UX
Design B
Design A
Idea1
Idea 2
Idea 3
Idea 4
Concept A
Concept B
Concept C
Concept D
Design C
Design D
Design E
Design F
Design G
Design H
Design I
Competitor A
Competitor B
Competitor C
Design J
Design K
Design L
Project
29
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Iterative projects
Business GoalsCustomer Goals
Other Units (Marketing, Sales,
etc.)
UX division
30
www.Bentley.edu/uxc @davidjuhlin www.davidjuhlin.com
Goals
Organizational Goals
User Group 1
User Goal 1
User Group 2
User Group 3
User Goal 2
User Goal 3
User Goal 4
User Goal 5
Thank you!
Bentley Univ. User Experience Centerwww.Bentley.edu/uxc@BentleyUXCLinked in group- Bentley UXC
David JuhlinUser Experience [email protected] @davidjuhlinwww.davidjuhlin.com