how ux evolves at companies: a new look at maturity models
DESCRIPTION
User experience design involves many skill sets and methods but companies don't always have staff with the right expertise or placed in dedicated user experience roles. This puts product designs at risk, especially in competitive markets. In an effort to advance user experience design to minimize taking risks with design, several maturity models were published that explain the different phases of corporate UX maturity. I have surveyed several user experience maturity models, identified the most important information, enhanced with my own experiences and simplified the delivery using a light hearted, easy to understand metaphor - an evolution scale. Each evolution level defines what methods are typically used, who typically does "design" at that level and most importantly what is needed to evolve to the next level. This infographic is a valuable tool to educate different development teams where they are in the user experience spectrum as well as outline what they need to do to evolve. It also helps to educate executives to set realistic expectations that this is a process that takes time and to help gain their support by plotting your competition on the same scale.TRANSCRIPT
HOW UX EVOLVES AT COMPANIES:
A New Look at Maturity Modelsby Rich ButtiglieriPresented to Usability Evaluation Methods (H543) @IUPUI
November 2013
Why UX Maturity Model?
Lots of published UX maturity models:
• Enterprise Usability Maturity, J. Ashley & K. Desmond(2010)
• Usability Maturity Models, T. Jokela (2010)
• Corporate UX Maturity, S. Van Tyne (2007)
• Corporate Usability Maturity Model, J. Nielsen (2006)
• Usability Maturity Model, J. Earthy (1998)
Universal theme
Every company or organization progresses through these stages in the same sequence, but at their own pace
Make it easy!
• Suitable for poster and PowerPoint
• Simple for teams to self identify
• Set realistic timeframe expectations
• Plot competitors to motivate
• Make it FUN!
UX Focus
• UX not discussed as an issue
Design Thinking
• Selfism “Design for people like us, we use it every day”
• UI typically designed by developers
0Unrecognized
00 years
• UX identified as importantRequired before advancing to next level
UX Focus
• UX has been identified as an issue and grassroots efforts begin
• Methods are not consistently applied
• Methods performed by staff not fully dedicated to UX, sometimes outsourced
• Typically done at end of development cycle
• Inconsistent quality
Typical Methods
• Heuristic review or usability test (formative but done at the end)
Design Thinking
• Unintentional Design “Users will be trained on the system”
• UI typically designed by developers and/or product experts
1Ad hoc
“Someone go figure out why users are having problems”
1• Proven positive results creates more demand• Dedicated budget for staff and studies
Required before advancing to next level
UX Focus
• Hire dedicated staff to conduct more volume of what has worked in level 1
• Quality becomes more predictable but inconsistent reports as the organization figures out what works
• Despite increased volume, it still feels too late to make significant changes to design resulting in very few recommendations influencing design
• UX applied to only a few projects
Typical Methods
• Heuristic review or usability test (formative but done both early and at the end)
• NEW! Mockups and prototypes developed for testing designs
Design Thinking
• Genius Design “We know our users so well”
• UI typically designed by dedicated designer (little ‘d’ design)
2Considered
“We need to do lots more of that ‘usability’ stuff”
2• Broader understanding of UX process• Unify UX processes and procedures• Define UX roles and skills needed
Required before advancing to next level
UX Focus
• UX process well defined
• Consistent quality and performance across projects, which leads to standards
• More recommendations are influencing design
• Starting to do discovery research to inform design (personas, field research)
• Documented context of use
Typical Methods
• Iterative evaluation with heuristic reviews or usability tests (formative/qualitative – greater focus on measuring ‘useful’)
• NEW! Competitive analysis, personas, field research
Design Thinking
• Activity Focused Design “In the field to study users”
• UI typically designed by dedicated designer (big ‘D’ design – context of use)
3Managed
“Lets study user behavior in context to discover unmet needs”
3• Systematic process• UX metrics requested to be used for product planning
Required before advancing to next level
UX Focus
• UX process well integrated with overall product development lifecycle
• Consistent and predictable quality, staff begins to present at UX industry conferences
• UX recommendations driving design and influencing business requirements
• UX metrics formalized, baseline measurements compared to new designs (summative)
Typical Methods
• Iterative evaluation with heuristic reviews or usability tests (formative/qualitative as well as quantitative), Competitive analysis, personas, field research
• NEW! Quantitative studies (baseline and comparative)
Design Thinking
• Experience Focused Design “What is it like to be a user?”
• UI typically designed by interdisciplinary team
4Integrated UX
“What is the state of the union with UX?”
4• Corporate commitment• Cultural buy-inRequired before advancing to next level
UX Focus
• UX is a corporate business strategy and applied to every product
• Continuously improving process
• Industry leading quality of methods, staff recognized as a leader at UX industry conferences
Typical Methods
• NEW! Forward thinking research/idea labs
5UX Driven (Institutionalized)
“All products must follow UX design process”
510 years
48” POSTER
