The behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for
I’ve given a few talks recently and by far and away the one idea that is resonating with people is the idea that the behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for.
It’s a simple statement, really. All it means is that what is happening on your web site or in your web application is a result of the current design you’ve created. If people are gaming the system, then your design allows for that. If people aren’t returning, then your design hasn’t given them reason to (or reminded them to). If people are signing up but aren’t getting started, then your design isn’t communicating the value of doing so or the way to do it.
The idea also subversively leads to a much closer monitoring of the behavior in question. If you start thinking in this way, you’ll find yourself asking “what, exactly, is the behavior we’re seeing?”. This alone is worth the price of admission…anything that gets designers more focused on the actual behaviors of their users is a good thing.
This idea can also change the mindset of design teams:
- It sharpens focus on the design of the product, not some other distracting thing
So many teams suffer from political infighting, unclear design goals, no vision for success, and many other things that simply stating that behavior is a result of current efforts really helps to bring focus to the situation. Instead of seeing design as something that certain people in the company do, we might recognize design as a response to the market and the behaviors that are happening there. - It puts responsibility on the design team
This idea puts the responsibility of what happens on a site squarely on the shoulders of design teams. This produces changes in the design team: they start investigating behavior to make sure that things are going well. Unfortunately, many designers don’t do this yet, usually because they are judged not by what’s happening but by one of two other ways: by how beautiful their work is or by how much they get done. Neither of these criteria is good from an interaction-design standpoint. The only thing that matters is what’s happening on the web site! - It elevates design in the discussion
Because this idea places responsibility square on the shoulders of the design team, it also elevates design in the discussion. All of a sudden we know where to go when the behavior isn’t what we want: the design team. Who do you call when things aren’t working right? The design team. Designers always seem to want a place at the table. By accepting that the behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for you might just get that seat…
The next time you’re in a meeting or a discussion with the folks you work with, try out this idea on them and see what happens. It might just change the way you work. I know it has for me.
Make them Care! - Struggling to communicate the value of your product or service? I'm writing a new book that shows you how to make people care about your product or service by clearly communicating the most important bits. For designers and marketers creating product web sites. Find out more.
Links to this Post
Comments
1. Cedric 9:29am, Tue 28th, 2009
I’m rather disturbed by the fact that you don’t include the question of content in your thinking.
Whatever the killer app you will design, without any valuable content, you won’t get any result.
So, in my own thinking, I can’t initiate a work without having a reflexion about the content.
2. Cedric 9:31am, Tue 28th, 2009
Precision : I know your article is about design and the behaviour wanted by this design, but I would have liked you to at least spell the word “content” one
3. Josh 9:31am, Tue 28th, 2009
@Cedric It’s not that I didn’t include the question of content…it’s more that I consider content issues design issues. So I included it implicitly. Do you see them as different activities?
4. Alok Jain 9:48am, Tue 28th, 2009
The idea here is simple and precise, the fact is we all are constantly designing even when we are not actively designing.
I normally talk about this in the context of leadership, the fundamental idea is that we influence everything around us, and the outcome will differ based on our actions.
5. Cedric 9:52am, Tue 28th, 2009
Well, maybe I’m under th influence of my former job, when I was a front-office developer, but yes, for me, they are totally different activities.
For example, when I look at Google Maps, I see 2 things :
- the content : a map incredibly well coded with cities, postcodes, distances, directions, POI…
- the design : the functionalities designed to make this wonderful content accessible to everyone.
6. Dale Cruse 10:04am, Tue 28th, 2009
Josh, this is an excellent point – one that I made note of during your An Event Apart presentation.
I think it’s a great truth because it doesn’t apply just to websites – it applies to life. If there’s a problem in your life like not having a spouse or a job or money, it’s often because that’s the behavior you designed for in your life!
7. Dave McFarland 12:05pm, Tue 28th, 2009
Sounds good, but how do we go about measuring behavior? Web analytics, one-on-one observation, eye-tracking apps, all of the above, or something else?
8. Josh 12:50pm, Tue 28th, 2009
@Dale…right on! It does apply to life…will have to mull that one over for a while…
9. Jack Christopher 1:43pm, Tue 28th, 2009
You see what you measure.
10. Jon Dale 4:03pm, Tue 28th, 2009
The biggest take-away I got from this, is that throughout an organization — both internal and a client — we need to have users’ behaviors at the forefront of our minds.
I’m a designer/developer and often get asked to “design something”, and the more you start to ask questions and unpack the initial request, there is often a lack of definition of exactly what behaviors we’re expecting our visitors to exhibit.
The main challenge I find, is not only educating myself, but then educating (convincing) everyone else so that it can happen.
11. David 4:58pm, Tue 28th, 2009
Really? This seems too product-centric . People don’t live in our products.
Isn’t the “interface” for a product more than screens? Interface, more abstractly, includes the social context that the user lives in – things like ‘culture’. Think about doctors in hospitals who refuse to use new medical technology because it requires “menial” data entry tasks. Is this really the result of the product design? (You could argue yes… that designers should should have accounted for this). But the rejection of menial data entry tasks is also an existing cultural behavior of doctors.
-David
12. Jason Grant 9:23am, Wed 29th, 2009
I agree that content is an incredibly important aspect of any web presence. Weak content will mean weak User Experience no matter what.
13. Hari Rajagopal 10:24am, Wed 29th, 2009
So if I look at
Design = Content + Presentation,
it all makes sense, whether it is a web site or a person, this is true.
Your idea that “the behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for.” applies equally to web sites and people.
I am now thinking, this truth applies to any creation, heck, even if I am hosting a dinner party, this is true.
14. Jonathan 5:36pm, Wed 29th, 2009
I agree with 11. The idea that the behaviour mirrors the design betrays a ridiculous belief in the power of that design. I’m a designer, but even I don’t think that (for example) if customers leave my site then factors like uncompetitive pricing, restrictive terms or unacceptable product propositions have nothing to do with it. If you really think that then you really need to climb out of your rear end!
15. Steve Baty 2:22am, Thu 30th, 2009
Josh,
Nice post and, as always, an interesting insight into the personal side of interaction design and designing for behaviour.
One of the critical points for me coming through in the discussion is the definition of ‘design’ in fairly narrow terms. I think if we view the Web application as a service, or a particular touchpoint of that service, then we can recognise elements like pricing, terms of trade and product features as being encompassed by the ‘design’.
Using an holistic notion of design – in either a service design or customer (in this instance) experience design sense – may help to resolve such criticism of your central point.
Steve.