在我的研讨会上,我经常被问到是否designers and developers can perform usability activities或者是否应该留给这些活动专用可用性专家。答案取决于您的情况;有几个重要的利弊使设计人员和开发人员分配到可用性。

Con:专业化推动性能

我们已经知道了Adam Smiththat specialized workers are more productive than people who try to do everything. That's true in the user experience disciplines as well. You can't even talk about "designers" as a single group. There are graphic artists, interaction designers, information architects, writers, and many other professionals, each of whom specializes in designing some aspect of the total user experience. Sure, a single person can do both visuals and information architecture, but such efforts will rarely match the quality of work done by dedicated specialists.

实际上,即使是可用性专业人员常常专注于可用性子场,如快速定性研究,正式测量研究,实地研究,竞争性研究,网站分析,调查,指南和标准等。

您必须做的更多活动,您将越少的时间来学习每个人的复杂性 - 以及您也可以与每个人建立的体验越多。缺乏经验对于可用性特别有问题,因为正确分析了用户行为的能力非常依赖于拥有的经验以前观察到各种行为

专业化的论点对于设计尤其引人注目,因为不同的个性类型倾向于在每个学科都倾向于Excel。设计显然向人们吸引了一个驱动器,以便将事物放在一起,而可用性需要分析思维和概念化技巧。

有许多其他领域的人可能会分为不同的工作类别。在电影制作中,例如,铅作用couldwrite the script, but it's usually better to have a skilled screenwriter do the job.

Pro:工作人员较少

如果每个项目团队有十个设计师,他们是用户体验设计的不同方面的每个专家的设计师。并且很棒的是,通过致力于多种形式的用户研究和其他可用性活动,可以支持该设计。

一家大公司通常拥有一个用户体验部门,其中几十个或甚至数百个这样的专业专家 - 一旦它被移动得足够了maturity scale在用户体验中适当投资。但是一家小公司(或未成熟的大公司)不会有这么大的团队。

在许多公司中,用户体验团队too small to justify a dedicated usability professional. Indeed, many project "teams" consist of a single person. Luckily, usability basics are easy enough to learn: we take team members through a simple用户在为期3天的研讨会中进行设计的测试

没有可用性人们没有理由不拥有可用性。Your team will benefit from doing some of the simpler usability activities itself, especially if following an敏捷development process。Discount user testing can be done with最小的资源

Con:缺乏客观性

但是,如果您测试自己的设计,您可能不太愿意承认其缺陷。设计师们可以太愿意将用户投诉或问题视为次要或不足,而实际上测试表明需要深度重新设计。此外,设计师可以在他们自己的理论中得到如此有关用户的理论应该to behave that they forget to test for cases in which people behave differently.

我们在我们的用户测试课程中教授的关键项之一就是如何write good test tasks那because most novice test facilitators use the wrong tasks and get poor data as a result. Designers are susceptible to employing tasks that focus almost exclusively on their own pet features rather than on goals that users really want to accomplish.

当然,如果你知道you might lack objectivity, you can proactively work to overcome this deficiency. For example, you can force yourself to include test tasks that go beyond the things you personally care about.

Designers can also increase their testing objectivity by asking colleagues to review their test plans or to listen in on a session or two.

Pro:更高的可信度,更容易沟通

当同一个人进行设计和可用性时,您不必担心设计师驳回可用性人的调查结果。人们倾向于相信自己的工作!

When different people focus on different project aspects, they have to communicate, which takes time in meetings and time for report writing. In contrast, when a designer runs a test, he or she knows what happened and can immediately start redesigning to fix the problems that the test identified. No meeting, no report, no communications overhead required, so long as the info is lodged within a single brain.

缺乏会议和报告的缺点是可用性调查结果不会被精制和讨论,这再次导致更少的深度见解和主要用户界面重新重量化。即使可用性报告是开销的,它们也是一个很好的建设方式制度记忆that will help new designers and future projects.

Any Test Is Better Than No Test

如果您能负担得起,专用可用性专家更好地执行您的项目可用性活动。但是,选择不在这种理想之间,无所事事。对于许多项目来说,有一个中间道路:让设计师或开发人员进行双重责任,并采取一些可用性工作。这比没有可用性要好得多。

全天课程

More details in the course onThe One-Person UX Team Tool Box