Technology, Simplifying the User Experience

How do we make it easy to use?

In 2011 I had the great fortune to have been awarded a Winston Churchill Fellowship. In 2012 I then took my research trip which went from the 11th May - 13th July. To say I had a ball is a vast understatement. But my trip was to research how we make technology easy to use and who is doing it and how are they doing it.
On my return I then needed to write up my report. If you are interested you can download it from the Churchill Memorial Site. But I thought I would put my executive summary and conclusion here.

Executive Summary

The impact of the complexity of technology is a major factor in the delivery of services to the Department for Child Protection. Currently we have a large and complex client records management system which is served from the desktop computers within the department. With the advent of the iPad and many other forms of mobile technology, the department is considering the possibility of using these types of devices in the field of child protection. Due to the size of many of these devices, the current style of design of many applications is not conducive to mobile devices. The biggest issue is the amount of screen space or territory that these mobile devices offer.

The main theme behind this project is to better understand the issues associated with usability and the reduction of complexity in the technology we use. A good example is with the current Apple iPads. If you talk to an owner of an iPad they will talk about what they do and create. Any mention about technology and complexity of the programs does not form any part of their conversation. Based on the view that if Apple can reduce complexity, then how can this be achieved with other technology? Can we reduce that complexity in the technology that the Department for Child Protection uses? How do we make technology facilitate the outcomes of our social workers?
This project took the perspective of four groups in the delivery of this technology. The groups were Users, Developers, Manufacturer’s and Business. From a user perspective the project was aiming an understanding what the user wants to achieve with their technology. What are the challenges and frustrations that users face when using technology?

As a developer, how did they come to their decisions in the development and delivery of products. The manufacturer’s was it based around sound user analysis and understanding the user’s needs? How did they align themselves with both their customers’ needs and the needs of their business? The Business or Government perspective was understanding why many don’t believe they are able to direct the outcomes.
During my research around the world I met many different companies, dealing with software and hardware; I visited Stanford and Harvard to meet with business departments and Human Computer Interaction (HCI) or Computer Human Interaction (CHI) to obtain an understanding how people in the field of usability and Human Factor Engineering (HFE) address these area of usability and interaction with technology.

The following report covers my journey and the interactions I had with the people and organisations that I met. I needed to understand the questions as well as look for answers. What I did learn was that as I gain more knowledge and information the less I knew and the more I needed to learn. I came across some really good questions and some better insights.

This trip and report is just the start of my journey and further education on this field of study. The experience has been priceless and set me on a solid foundation to better inform organisations on the topic of usability and to simplify the technology that we use.
 

Conclusion

In conclusion, I have found that the more I learn the less I know and the more I need to learn. The experience has given me a greater appreciation and insight into the area of usability, especially making technology easier to use. The use of anything new being it phone, TV or computer is one factor that is common to all and that is design. Design of the actual device and the design in how we use it to get the outcome we are looking to achieve.
I have met people in the areas of software development, manufacturing, business, educational institutions and usability instructors and consultants as well as authors who write on the topic and other areas that are influenced with and by usability. From these interactions, I have discovered that the issue of usability and addressing it is not new. The topic of Usability and Human Factor Engineering has been around for well over
60+ year and is a doctoral subject. However, many factors have led us to this point in time with our use of technology. The speed of the change in our technology has a big impact to its usability.

Steve Job’s at Apple saw this more than most, and the work that he has done in taking Apple from the brink of bankruptcy has been to his efforts in challenging the norm. He has done this by thinking differently to what has gone in the past. Using one of his famously quoted statement “Think Different” he looked at what people were wanting to achieve and doing that as simply as possible. This is designing for outcomes rather than just capturing data.

Computers started in the laboratories but then moved to the domestic market. From there, the technology grew organically and it was the realm of the nerds and geeks. Software was looked upon as magic by many in the domestic market. It was a toy for the geeks and nerds; and due to that fact it had a major influence as to how software and the applications were developed. Much of the learning in this space did not have too much structure and was the realm of trial and error. Skills were shared and learnt quickly but from the perspective of the geeks and nerds. They understood what could be done and had some idea of how they
were going to deliver the outcomes. Those outcomes were usually grounded in sound computer skills or programming structure and design.

The approach of developers was to capture the information or data, manipulate that data to produce the results that were being sought. This was usually by a set of business rules and algorithms. The resulting information was then reported to the screen and or printer. In the early days of application and the web everyone had their view on what worked. Over time standards were developed but they were from the perspective of the developers. There were early attempts to address usability and standards started to appear. Many of the early attempts at this area of computer use were based on the visual aesthetics and design elements. People like Jakob Nielsen based a lot of this work in conjunction with Don Norman on Human Computer Interaction science in which Jacob held a Ph.D. and Donald Norman who worked in the field of cognitive science, design and usability engineering. The Nielsen Group led much of the discussion and debate about website usability and the standards around building these sites.

Every so often, there would be software or hardware that came along that changed how we interacted with computers and software systems. The biggest of these was the introduction of the Apple MAC. Before then many worked at the command line with strange commands and sequences of letters, numbers and names. Windows came along making access to this technology a little easier but it was still not mainstream. In the early 90’s came the internet and from there grows daily our interactions and fascination of the technology.

It was not until Steve Jobs had returned to Apple in 1996 that things started to really change in design and interfaces within technology. When the iPad was released in January 2010, people started to see that the use of technology could be made easier. That influence of the iPad and iPhone has changed our understanding of the use of complex technology. These innovations have led to the raising of the expectations of users and the technology they use.

What Steve Jobs brought about was the consideration of outcomes based design. As Apple designed its products, the market started to understand that technology can be easy and intuitive to use, by designing products to function the way people think and work and not on the capabilities of the device. Interfaces of the past were more about the functions and features, while not much effort was place in the aesthetics. The issue was that unattractive, convoluted, or illogical interfaces would feel like a chore when using the application even if it was a great product. Use of these systems became the realm of the geek and nerds. With the advent of the iPad and iPhone, beautiful, intuitive, compelling user interfaces enhance the application’s functionality. It inspired a positive emotional attachment in users. This has increased to such an extent that these devices have now become personal; people place a large amount of emotional attachment to these devices. The devices are taken everywhere in their daily lives and events People cannot go to bed at night unless it is nearby.

My project was to get a better appreciation on the how’s and why’s of technology usability. In better understanding, this topic I could potentially apply this knowledge to how we go about developing products and services for our field staff. The experience of this trip has led me to discoveries that there is nothing special, there is no silver bullet or solution in getting this right other than our approach. We have the ability, the technology, the understanding and have always been aware of the issues. But I believe it is in our approach to development of devices and solutions that we need to consider.

In the past, we have concentrated on the capturing and the data. We have been worried that if we miss the data, we will not be able to carry out the task. In many systems and devices, this has been to the detriment of the user and their experience in working with these systems. As time went by we started to address usability but it has been treated as an afterthought. Most of the work in this area has been based around the aesthetics of the interface, system and or device. The problem was that by the end of the project when usability people were involved with the project, much of the work needed to be carried out could not as the product was about to leave the building. So usability was more based on aesthetic look and feel.

Steve Jobs turned that concept on its head by changing the focus and the point of engagement of the designer and engineers getting together at the start of the project and having a far greater involvement overall and on the outcomes of the product and services. The first Apple Computer led this. Where Steve Wosniak wanted to release the computer as a kit, Steve insisted that it be developed as a completed computer. By the time the first MAC computer came to market this concept had been developed to a far great level. The problem was a new company and not having the financial backing. Steve Jobs ended up being removed from the company. On his return, he was face with a company that was close to bankruptcy. He redefined what the company would develop. It was taken from a line of some 20 or 30 lines of products to four. Laptops for home and business and desktops for home and business. Company moral was raised over 100% and focus was towards building the best product.

What had changed was the perspective that was taken when developing both products and services. They asked simple questions as they were developing and designing. Was what was the end user trying to achieve? They gathered all the things that were believed to be needed. Then they concentrated on reducing elements until only the elements needed to achieve the outcome were left. Everything was centred on the end user experience and how the user was empowered to use the device. In my meetings and visits, I was researching how companies are starting to address the issue of outcomes based design. How are they implementing those perspectives and practices in to the production of their products and services? Is there something that was a mystery in what they are doing or how they are doing it? To what level are they embracing this approach and is it based on a solid foundation? Could I learn from their work and apply it to our work in Child Protection or any agency that dealt with the public? I was aiming to achieve an understand how technology and its solutions could become better enablers to the field of social work and not a barrier to carrying out their tasks.

What I had started to discover was that companies are starting to take this seriously and it was due to the financial survival, that the end users were becoming more vocal. Comments such as “make it like the iPad”, it is easy to use and “you don’t need much training” is having an impact on the adoption of the different technologies, software and services. The users have a taste of technology that is enabling them to do what they have not been able to carry out in the past; they are feeling more in control. My experience to date has shown that the approach that Apple had started is having an effect on what people are looking to achieve
with their technology. In addition, they are asking the question “why can’t they work like the iPad?” This raised the question. Why all technology can’t be designed in the same manner as the Apple products.

I now know that I need to address this issue of technology complexity. It was in a single line in a recent TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) conference video. Reduce the complexity and simplify and….

“Design for Outcomes and the Experience”

Day 4 - Visit to Fujitsu and Oracle

Today I started at Fujitsu. This was arranged by Fujitsu in Australia. I meet with Jane Yin at the front desk where she then lead me to a meeting room where there were a number of the members of her associates of Fujitsu Laboratories of America Inc.


Initially the meeting commenced with a presentation by Yasunori Kimura, Ph.D. who is the President and CEO of the Laboratories. He went through the goals and aspirations of the laboratories and the areas that they specialize in. I am waiting on some literature and information that is being forward to me of the topics we covered.


After Ysunori, Hideaki Tanioka, Ph.D. a Senior Software Engineer gave a presentation of the work he has been involved with mobile phones. He was demonstrating with a Fujitsu phone which had multiple sensors built into the phone. Also a number interactive applications which utilised those sensors. He demonstrated a Posture program which could assess your mobility and posture and then based on a number of exercises, basic where while holding the phone in a fixed position you then went through a number of physical flexibility exercises. Upon completing these exercises it then gave the user an assessment and proposed exercises to improve or correct posture. There were a number of these applications utilising the sensors of the phone and then providing analysis of the results. There were applications for improving your golf swing. Again the user goes through a number of swing exercises with the phone strapped on their back of their belt. After those exercises the phone is again able to give analysis and assistance on that swing.


One of the applications I suggested was with disable or elderly people where based on a number of business rules the phone could automatically contact assistance to support the person.


The next demonstration was by Matthew DePetro. He gave a demonstrations of the newly release Robot Teddy.

Robot Teddy

Check out the video, not the best camera work but I am learning. This was a great experience and I identified an area where this could be used by DCP. Jane was keen that I followed her up on my return and she would be happy to look into working with us and how we could use this robot. 

The area that I felt was with child interviews and talking with children who require assistance to open up. Check out the video and see what you think.

This teddy had sensors all over its body a camera in its nose with face recognition software. Over a period of time this teddy interacts with the subject within its gaze.


After this demo Ajay Chander a Senior Researcher in Health Care Innovations showed me the work he has been working on with sensors and a mini computer the size of your palm called Sprout. This is a small computer with a Linux operating system with a web server and wireless and blue tooth capability. They are designing on the concept of open source being sensor independent so designed to work with any. The idea of the Sprout is compile and time stamp the data then provide the analytics's to combine and re-constitute that data to be read in other combinations. 


Many of the organisations provide sensors to capture data for heart beat, or breathing, or stress measurements but no-one at the moment is providing the ability to capture all the different data streams and then aggregates them to be seen from other perspectives. After that demonstration we went to lunch, finding a very nice Indian restaurant. 


After this I then headed back towards San Francisco to visit Oracle.

Oracle Head Office

The second building on the left with the Oracle name was where I went to 3pm to visit Jatin Thaker, Director, User Experience Oracle Applications User Experience. Jatin gave me a presentation on the ideology that Oracle is work to in the development and creation of their software and tools. 


It was a good feeling of confirmation as to their model for their software development life cycle. Is very close to what I have been using for many years. The key part being that until the problem is understood and a solution design and prototyped there is no code developed. The large part of the process is understand and design and sign off before any development is done. 


A lot of the style of tools that will be coming down the line with Oracle, Fusion, PeopleTools and PeopleSoft will have these type of things embedded. 


Jatin then gave me a demonstration of the eye tracking screen. This tool is capable of providing considerable information to designers and developers of software. I would track the users eye movement based on a number of exercises. One of the exercises was to location the name of the manager on the screen of a persons record. It was made up of a number of panel and I looked all over to locations where I thought that information might be. From there once it was completed we were able to see where I was looking and when I found the answer. Then we could switch on other users and then see the correlation between my results and others with multiple results they can then blend them into a head map and see over all what all the users were doing on the screen. The information is in-valuable and can lead to better understand how a user would work and improve the design based on the user not the developer.


This tool is now quite an acceptable price which looks to be around $25-30,000.


If Finished up around 4:30pm and then headed back to my residents. After a while I then went for a drive up into the hill over looking Palo Alto and after a while headed into San Francisco City to see the Golden Gate Bridge at sunset then home.

Over Looking Palo Alto

Golden Gate at Sunset - (Not the best photo)

Day 1 - Perth Airport

Well the journey begins, I arrived nice and early as the flight was early and didn't want any of the family having to then go home to continue the day without any sleep. Tom drove me in and being that it is an international journey I thought we would start by going to Perth International. Got the photo out the front which included the name Perth International Airport. Then upon checking found that I needed to be at Terminal 2 which is the domestic airport.


This is why its a great idea to get their early, so we jumped into the car again and headed over to the domestic airport. Then had a coffee and muffin with Tom before sending him home while I waited for the desk to open. So now at 4:45am sitting in the Qantas Club Lounge waiting for my call. The best part was I found out the upgrade I requested was approved so the long leg from Sydney to LA will be business class. :) Happy!


I have tried for quite a number of years to get upgraded and finally I have made it. Finally received an email from Apple who have agreed to a meeting at the head office which is great. So for my first week I will be visiting Apple, Google, Oracle, SAP, Fujitsu and Stanford University. So a busy week ahead as well I will be doing some sight seeing. Catching up with a good friend who moved form Melbourne to work at CISCO. We are going to fly along the cost in a small Cessna, this will be fantastic and I will have camera in tow.


So for now no pictures but hopefully I can upload them once I am in SF. 


Signing off for now 5:10am Perth

Day 0, no more days left to count down, nor for the hours :)

0 Days, 21 hours, 5 minutes and 27 seconds

before I fly out of Perth

Well I am packed and ready. The has been a year in the planning and I believe I have some very good appointments around the world lined up. In some ways it has been disappointing with some of the companies I have tried to make appointments with, the in ability of them to respond to an email. The other disappointment is people that I had made contact with giving a years notice and staying in contact over the year then not being available. But that is just the way it goes. But as some have dropped out others have become available and some exceptional invitations.

There are to many to mention here but I will be talking with everyone that has supported me in obtaining my appointment and thanking them personally for their efforts.

So the Plan...

I leave home around 1:45am and my son will drop me off at the airport. As it is a school day and he does not need to be at Uni until later in the day he offered the lift. That way I can say good night to Frances and Daisy and Tom will take me in the morning.

I board in Perth and fly out 5:45am to Sydney. At the moment looking at an hour or so then I board the flight to LA. I have been able to quire a few frequent flyer points from Frances and Tom, (Thank you) so I have requested to get an upgrade to Business for the two long legs of the whole trip. They being the Sydney to LA and the London to Singapore. I find out 5 hrs before the flight if I have been upgraded, fingers crossed.

So from LA I then fly to San Francisco for an hour, pick up the hire car and head to Redwood City where I will be staying for the period 11th May - 19th May. Redwood City is just 5 mins from Stanford University where I will be visiting and talking with a number of people from the Human Computer Interactive Department. I have been invited to two event at the university workshop and a presentation over a Lunch. I will also visit the university for a tour before so I am aware of the locations that I will be attending.

While in SF I will be visiting Oracle, Fujitsu, SAP, Stanford, Google, Facebook and hopefully Apple. Any way this is the beginning and I will report on a daily basis where possible. The first report form SF will be delayed due to the fact that I will be flying for about 20 hours.

I will talk with you soon.

My final day at work before heading off

9 days, 13 hours, 48 minutes and 17 seconds
till my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012

The time is drawing close and I will commence my trip for my Churchill Fellowship. For the people who will be following this blog I make no promises to the grammer and spelling. I will endevour to be correct but sometime things happen. :)

My goal is to blog each day but the first one or two may be late as I will be in a number planes for upto 17 hours and waiting for some others. All up I should be flying and travelling for close to 20+ hours. But the best part is I am flying back in time. I leave Perth at 5:45am on the 11th May heading for Sydney. From Sydney to LA and then San Francisco. I leave Sydney at 1:30pm on the 11th May and arrive in San Francisco at 1:30pm on the 11th May. So it will be a long trip but I won't lose much of the journey :)

I will have camera in hand and taking photos all the way. For those who know me this is but one of my hobbies that I really enjoy so I will endevour to photograph as much as I can. The last trip I took was for 6 weeks and I had taken 3000 photos I am quite sure in the 9 Weeks on my Churchill and the week going to a conference in Sri Lanka I will break that barrier.

For those who did not know I have been invited to attend a FutureGov Conference in Sri Lanka talking with many IT govenment representatives from around the Asia Pacific to be a member of a Panel discussing e-Government and the use of Mobile technology. So as part of this blog I will be reporting on my attendance to that conference.

So I will sign off for now and my next posting will be the beginning of my trip. If you have any questions please post them to this blog and I will attempt to answer all questions.

What is different in developing applications for mobile devices?

11 days, 14 hours, 48 minutes and 19 seconds
till my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012

Is there a difference in the way we develop applications for mobile devices?

Some would say no, but I believe that the whole process of mobile application development has started to change in quite a big way. I don't believe that it just a matter of better delivery of content and function of larger screen devices to work in a smaller foot print. As Steve Jobs said many years ago "Think different".

We are now starting to see the whole concept of User Centric Design take a far great role in this area. Companies are tired of systems that require major levels of training, it is a major cost and keeps people form doing their work. Technology was supposed to make our lives easier, in most cases it has created even more complexity. More of today's mobile application development and design philosophy is creating application that are simple and intuitive. This has resulted in less training and freeing people to do more of what they need to do in getting their work done. 

For many years business has abdicated its responsibility in this area. Sighting that it was two complex and that the technical people or developers knew best. Well the developers did know their stuff in the area of application development but there were not many that understood business and how critical the proven and tested processes and practices made their business sustainable.

I remember an experience where I was reviewing systems that ran many functions a local government body. One of those processes was to register a dog. A simple task I hear you say. Well in this application it took no lest that 72 steps. To register the owner, then register the dog against that owner. There were so many different areas and places to navigate and then you could not simple move on you had to reverse up to then dig down into another area. Does this remind you of any application you have had to use?

We hear the stories when these systems are installed that entire business processes which have been proven and tested over the years are having to be changes to align with the technology. In some cases this has been good for a business, especially when there were no defined processes. But in other cases good solid practices and processes have been thrown out for the sake of technology. Business had thought that it must be good, because it was the latest and other companies or organisations had done it. 

The good news is the tide is turning in many ways. Once we have seen that it can be made easy and intuitive. Apple has shown this with their designs and how their applications work together. They require little if any training and people are up and working with the technology. The most interesting part is that the technology has become transparent. If you talk to owners of iPhone's and iPad's they will talk to you about what they do and how they create things. There is no discussion on the underlying technology. They just use it. 

I always try to have systems pass the "mum test". If I can get my mother to look at a system and explain to me how it works then it passes. No, I don't live with my mother but it is the analogy I am trying to get across. Systems need to be designed with the idea that the end user most of the time does not understand the technology, systems or applications. All they want to do is their job quickly and efficiently. They have a job to do and need to get it done. 

So designing systems that are aligned with their current practices and processes makes far greater sense. Understanding the processes which an end user is familiar with and then designing around that reduces the need for training. How? Well if the processes are well founded and structure when they get to use such a system designed around those processes they already know the next step.

So you ask; how do we do this type of application development?

This I believe requires a re-think in our approach to gathering the information for this type of development. We need to engage in the science of Usability and User Centric Design (UX). We need to analyse and use the skills of Business Analysis. If there is one role which many developers don't appreciate and understand it is the role of a good Business Analysis. 

First up let’s put a definition of what is not a Business Analyst. That is someone who has been in software development or technology and woke up and decided to refer to themselves as a Business Analyst, and then express their years in the industry as years of experience as a Business Analyst. This IS NOT a Business Analyst . 

A Business Analyst is a specialised skill set. A Business Analyst can work in many different fields and usually has extensive business process experience. The skill they bring to the table is understanding processes, identification of those processes and being able to articulate them in such a way that both the business and developers understand what is to be achieved. 

This skill set is transferable across many industries and as the industry content is not what is being reviewed and documented. The most important skill is their ability to raise questions that the business did not know needed to be asked or answered. 

Now that we have an understanding of what I believe is a Business Analyst, the next part in mobile application development is understand the processes. I believe this to be paramount in the cycle and have often been neglected. That is talking to and understands the end user. Identifying who they are and what and how they currently do their work. Having a true understand of their current processes, then working with those processes to clarify, document and if needed streamline. Once this exercise has been done when the application is finally ready to deliver there is less resistance to change and adoption of the new application.

Many time developer tend to try and change the inefficiencies they perceive via the application.  If these are identified then they should be feed back to the Business Analyst to go back to the process to clarify and confirm, adapt and change then modify the application. Doing this in the application without end user involvement results in resistance to adoption and a breakdown of the relationship.

The process of making changes via the application and not via the physical process has been the practice in the past and is still practices by some developers. 

Business in the past has ended up accepting this process and way of application development because they did not feel empowered enough to push back. We times are a changing and business is starting to question the so call experts. 

How much easier would it have been if these modifications were identified and proven in the field so to speak, before pushing them through with a new application. It would have reduced resistance, adoption and training as they would already have been in place.

The other area in mobile application development is the logic of processes. Some processes require an order some don't. The main thing is change is inevitable. Locking a system down which required costly expense to modify just creates conflict. The whole idea of process and flows is the need to remember that applications do a number of things. The collect data and then apply business rules or flows. Again in understanding the processes currently in place application developers can take valuable lessons and apply them. 

So if we identify the containers and then apply the business rule or process, keeping these distinct we can then always modify. The problem comes when systems are written in such a way that the containers, business rules and processes are so intertwined they become very expensive to manage and maintain. And when it comes to the time to upgrade and improve the underlying systems business finds that it is required to start again and rebuild. But that is not until they have forked out considerable expense in obtaining the system in the first place.

What happens under the cover the users usually does not care. To some developers that can be distressing, well as the business or end user is paying I think that some developers need to get a thicker skin. 

From the end user perspective if it looks right and the output is delivering the expected result, the process is aligned to a proven and practices process which reduces training then I believe you will have far more success in the delivery of business Mobile Application Development. But most importantly change is inevitable and any system that cannot adapt with that change is a waste of money.

There are three questions that business should always apply to any technology to understand if it has any value for their business. They are:

1. Does it save me time?

2. Does it save me money? or 

3. Does it save me time and money.

Anything else is just a gimmick

Further Development of My Research Topic

84 days, 21 hours, 59 mins and 07 seconds

till my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012

Well time is moving on and the date of my leaving is drawing near. I am finding the more I talk about my trip and its research the more it helps me to clarify what I hope to achieve. I initially was looking at the usability aspect of mobile technology from the perspective of four view points. They being:

1. The User,
2. The Developer,
3. The Manufacturer, and
4. Business

But as the research I am doing is in relationship to what we can achieve in helping our field workers in the area of Child Protection. I have now been able to arrange meetings with three organisations which are doing work in this area and using mobile technology. 

The mobile technology space is close to the coal face as they say. Not as close as I would have hoped as I never considered the physical issues and intimidation of technology on our clients. These are issues which would need to be addressed but will not be part of my research. So to better understand where this fits I started to picture the data path in which the first part is to capture the data as soon as practical. This is the space that I will be concentrating on mainly but understanding the whole data path I believe is important as well as highlighting other areas of research to tie the whole process.

Data Path and My Area of Research

To better understand the topic of the data path I have come up with the following drawing.

The capture of data starts with the client, but the digital capture could happen sometime after that. Once it has been captured it is then transmitted either wireless or via a network. The data is then placed into a system, analysed, distributed and from there the agent is then able to interact with that data to provide the best service. 


Along this path are many points of quality control and distribution, sharing of that information with the relevant and authorised bodies. The task at hand is to capture that data while maintaining the quality of information. Get it to a central system to be analysed and then shared with the authorised and appropriate support services. These are the many challenges and much work is needed in both to understand the stakeholders within the path of data and the human element. 


The opportunities to analyse and  carry out some predictive analysis is enormous so are the consequences if we get it wrong. The important part of this whole exercise is not to forget that we are dealing with people and some of the most vulnerable people in our society. The out comes and benefits and outcomes when we have it right can also be enormous.


My research is that initial data capture. I am specifically looking at the technology that is on offer and how we can enable staff in the field to do their job with the complexity. We need to make it intuitive and simple. Understanding how people work with the technology, how developers design and build their software on those devices as well as the manufacturers of the devices. An finally the agencies and businesses who have the task and understanding how to engage them to better understand how they can influence and impact on what is delivered.


On my trip I will be meeting other organisations that are using mobile technology in the field and understand how they use and benefit form it. How did they go about designing and implementing their solutions? Was it design with the user in mind or where they an after thought? Or, where they never considered and the direction and application was driven from the technical and functional aspects as perceived by a developer?


There are many questions and I dare say I will not get all the answers but I will have a far better understanding and then be able to communicate that understanding to others. Hopefully that understanding can and will have an impact on how we do our jobs.

Time moves on

196 days, 17 hours, 2 minutes and 11 seconds
until my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012
Perth>SF>Seattle>Austin>NY>Boston>London> Heidelberg >Salzburg>Vienna>Singapore>Perth

Time keeps moving

Its always intresting to see how time seems to be slow when you are waiting, and then you get going and time seems to spead up. I started blogging about my trip at the 294 days point as so I am about to trip over the first 100 days. In that time I have secured my locations of where I am going and a number of good contacts to visit and talk with. That exercise is still progressing and become more interesting each day as I discover other opportunities.

My next milestone comes from my army days when we counted down from 100 days. That was during my time at the Army Apprentice School of Music. That point was referred to as "Crab Night" and we would go all around town painting pictures of a crab with a number in it which would represent our years intake. Mine at that time was 29th, the goal was to get the image in the most unusal spot. We I won't be doing that but maybe put one up on this blog at the 100 day point, which will be  the 1st Feb 2012.

As time moves on I am becoming more focused on what it is I hope to achieve. I have now brought it down to looking at the issue of interface design and usability from four angles. They are:

1. The user perspective: How they learn? What is good and bad in usability? What indicates to a user good usability?
2. The Developer: How does a developer consider usability? What are they trying to achieve? Is usability a consideration within the process of usability? Are they able to separate their passion to develop and take a user perspective in their work?
3. Manufacturers: How do they address this issue in their design? Is this a marketing issue or and engineering issue? Who defines the direction with usability? How is this defined?
4. Business: How do we re-engage business to be involved with the conversation of usability at the start of a project? Does business see a need or value? Why has business advocated this responsibility? Have they or is it a matter of an inability to communicate their needs? What can we do to engage and show the value to a business in being involved at the start and not complaining at the end?

These are my focus and I dare say I will not find all the answers but at lease I will be able to start the conversation towards a better user centric approach to the use of technology in general and specifically to mobile technology.

The other question which is highlighted with a recent patent awarded to Apple is should functional design beable to be patented? will this become an inhibitor to innovation? Many of the things we use today are built on the past.

A simple example is the mouse. Invented Dr Douglas Engelbart at Stanford Research Institute.

Dr Douglas Engelbart and the first mouse

Future Design Mouse

Imagine if that was patented to the extent that it stopped anyone from building and improving on it. These two mouse are basically the same. They plot on a flat screen the X ,Y coordinates of a cursor to a person to engage programs on a screen.

The other area is tablet computers and boy have they come a longway.

Star Trek Deep Space Nine

Star Trek the Original

Star Trek Next Generation

There is Kirk way back in about 1966-67 using a tablet computer with a pen device. Then Picard on Next Generation using quite a thin tablet. All well before the release of some of todays computer companies offering in this space. Admitidly they are only props but I dare say they were the seeds to some of the ideas that are presented today.

Where will it go, well you only need to look at movies like the Minority Report and Avitar. Then look at what Corning are doing. A good example can be seen on youtube, a video called the Day Made in Glass. Another good video is Microsoft's Surface 2 technology this is the future and it is on the door step of tomorrow. Only last year at CES Samsung display their Amoled transparent display technology.

To take it to the n'th degree check out the Mozilla Seabird Concept Phone. This is a concept but all of the technology is available today. So it is just a mater of time.

Transparent displays and devices that are aware of other devices to then transfer content. Recently a number of companies have released the bump technology to transfer between devices and MIT presented their research on transparent batteries so lots are on their way. Let hope this line of patent wars will not slow down innovation to see the world from one perspective. Its interesting to see the history of companies and where they have come from. The battles againt big corporates while they were small and the things they did to get where they are now, and to see that they are now the big corporates defending themselves and battling the small startup of the future. As they always say what comes around goes around.

Clarification of how I will approach the topic

211 days, 17 hours, 50 minutes and 44 seconds
until my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012
Perth>SF>Seattle>Austin>NY>Boston>London> Heidelberg >Salzburg>Vienna>Singapore>Perth

The more I think of my topic the more I spend considering how I should approach the topic and get the most of the trip. In my previous blog I considered the questions I am looking to address, but as I read more I am starting to realise the approach and thought process will have a bearing on the outcomes.

The thinker

I have been reading an article which was written by Tim Brown of IDEO. The article itself can be found at Design Thinking . 


One of the key pieces of information I got from this article was the definition of design think that was put simply, 


"It is a discipline that uses the designer's sensibility and methods to match people's needs with what is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity."


But the main idea behind design thinking is that it is a "methodology that imbues the full spectrum of innovation activities with a human-centred design ethos."  I really believe that we have to focus on the human-centred aspect but to do that there is an engagement process that has to be addressed. 


Technology has to accept that whatever is designed it needs to be human-centred, but the other side of the debate is how do we engage the human side to own and get involved. Life was to become easier with all the new technology but it has not. It has become more complex and to many people frustrating. As Steve Jobs once quoted: "Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."


I believe many forget that and that is one of the main points I am hoping to better understand. How do we go about better design with the respect to the use of this technology. How can we design to empower rather than dis-empower the end user. 


Business and users know what works for them, they have been trailing and testing it for years. So how do we design those proven and tested processes so that we can get the efficiencies of the technology without reinventing proven processes which only need to be more efficiently expressed in the technology so that the technology becomes transparent.


The best example of transparent technology is watching owners of iPad's and a lot of apple products. If you engage them in a conversation about what they are doing you will hear about all the creative products that they produce and the enjoyment they get at producing it. Very rarely if ever with they talk about the technology.

Understanding Your Research Goal, Before Doing Your Research.

226 days, 13 hours, 26 minutes and 31 seconds
until my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012
Perth>SF>Seattle>Austin>NY>Boston>London> Heidelberg >Salzburg>Vienna>Singapore>Perth

I have been listening to several HBR (Harvard Business Review) Idea Cast and it has raised many ideas. One of the main themes that have been coming out of several the Podcasts was that knowing the objective you are looking to achieve in what you do. As you may have guested this is the areas I am recording my journey in my research overseas for my Churchill Research Project.

The information I placed in my application for the 2011 Churchill Fellowship was:

"New Frontiers in Technology for Child Protection

This project will explore how breakthroughs in mobile technology can help social workers in the field, and providing an improved child protection service. It will examine how to remove usability barriers imposed by the complexity of unwieldy applications and devices. It will try to remove, or moderate, the impersonal use of technology in meetings, with clients, where a high degree of empathy and emotional intelligence are needed. Working with experts in child protection this project will seek ways to record and process information captured in the field using a new generation of smart devices and innovative software applications. Key goals will be in a drop in staff workload, improved access to information for colleagues, and a rich interaction with clients strengthened by the removal of technology barriers. A decreased in computer training can be achieved due to better understanding of usability and human interfaces into these devices. This will allow staff more time to focus on relationships with clients."

During my time since being awarded the scholarship I have been thinking more about my topic in this research. Working to better understand what it is I hope to communicate in my final paper.  Trying to better understand how my trip better arm me with the necessary information to address my topic. But to understand what I will need, I need to better explain exactly what I am trying to achieve. In other words my objectives and why I am going where I am going as well as why am I meeting the companies and people that I have identified so far.

I am looking to address my topic from four aspects. They are:

1.    Technology - The actual device be it a tablet, laptop, ultra- laptop and desktop computer

2.    Software – The design of the software and the usability aspects of that software

3.    Business – How do we re-engage business to usability? To be involved in the discussion before the product or services is developed

4.    Usability – In general how do we go about addressing usability both in design of specific technology and then the interfaces into the systems that are used on this technology?

To address these questions I am working to meet with several different people, companies and organisations involved in technologies. In meeting with these organisations I am hoping to better understand the questions that need to be asked and considered where building, developing and using technology. Other organisations I hope to meet and talk with are organisations which use technology and understanding how they have addressed these questions and do they have some of the answers.

My first stop will be San Francisco (SF) where I have made contact with Stanford University where I will be meeting Professor Terry Winograd. He is a professor of computer science and is involved with the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) Department. He has invited me to visit and to be involved in any of the workshops that might be running at that time. Here I hope to find out about the study of human computer interaction and what is studied.

While in SF I am also arranging to meet representations at Cisco, Facebook, Google and Apple. But as it still is sometime before I head off I am waiting to make contact early in the New Year. I am fortunate to have a close friend, Jack & Lucy who now lives in SF and works for Cisco.

Following SF I then head to Seattle to meet with Microsoft. I am hoping to see their futures laboratories but this is to be confirmed. I have made contact with the Child Protection Agency in Seattle but still waiting on a response. I will follow this up in the New Year. From Seattle I then head to Austin Texas where I will be visiting Motion Computing a manufacturer of tablet computers. Looking at their work with tablets and how they go about design their product. While in Austin I am hoping to catch up with the Department for Child Protection who did a case study on their use of tablet computers in the field. And finally I have received confirmation from Craig Tomlin to meet and discuss his work in Usability. I came across Craig on a blog discussing his views about usability and it was a re-buttle to a response to his article from Charles Mauro of Mauro New Media. I then head to New York to actually me up with Charles.

In New York I have confirmed meetings with Charles Mauro, Adam Greenfield of urbanscale LLC | Design. Adam I came across in a book he wrote called "Everyware" - The dawning age of ubiquitous computing. After reading this book I then started to research Adam and found him in New York and approached him to see if he would meet to discuss some of his idea. He has agreed and is another of my interviews. I have also arrange meetings with the Chief Software Architect of Epicenter Consulting. As well as a number of other contact if I get the time. One of the other locations I am hoping to visit is the IBM futures laboratories just outside of NY but this is still being worked on.

I then head off to Boston to visit MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This has been one of the locations I have dreamt about and the opportunity presented itself. I have made contact with a professor involved in HCI and Usability and will be meeting. I am still trying to find a contact at Harvard to see if I could discuss the business angle with this research project. From Boston I then head to London, UK.

In London I am still working on my contacts. Child Protection in the UK comes under Health but is managed in the shires and Burroughs. I am fortunate in that I have a contact in the Department here in WA who has worked in the UK in the area and working on a contact there. From London I then head to Heidelberg to visit SAP.

SAP recently purchased a company called Sybase and they have a technology which is used in the production and deployment of mobile solutions. At this point in time I don't have much more information. I will be flying into Frankfurt and then taking a train to Heidelberg. From Heidelberg I then catch a train to Salzburg.

In Salzburg I will be visiting  the university of Salzburg and their HCI department. Again I have made contact with one of the professors their and this discussion is to be further developed. I am there as with most places for a week so I am leaving this opportunity open to see what I can achieve. From Salzburg I then catch a train to Vienna.

In Vienna I will be visiting C.U.R.E. the Centre for Usability Research and Engineering. I have has some initial discussions with one of the staff at this centre and this will get further developed early next year. Finally after eights weeks I then head to Singapore via London.

Singapore is 4-5hrs from Perth and will be where I was going to take a break. But I just can't help myself and have already found a connection there. I have made contact with MicroUsability one of the largest usability organisations in the world which is based out of Mumbai. Again I have a confirmed contact and will be corresponding in the New Year to fix dates and times. 

When I arrive in Singapore I will be meeting up with my wife after the initial 8 week for a bit of a break. Before heading back to Perth and work on the 16th July after leaving on the 11th May I would have travelled over 29,000 miles and meet many different people and hopefully be in a better position of understanding to be able to offer some insights into better designs for usability aspect in the area of Child Protection.

Stay tuned for more information as it come to hand. 

Leg No 10: - Singapore - 7th - 13th July

238 days, 15 hours, 27 minutes, 38 seconds
until my Churchill Trip - 11th May - 13th July 2012
Perth>SF>Seattle>Austin>NY>Boston>London> Heidelberg >Salzburg>Vienna>Singapore>Perth

The final leg of this trip is to Singapore. To date I don't have anyone lined up. This is still being worked on and is not part of my official trip. I have added 1 week of my own leave to relax and will be meeting up with my wife as I would have been away for 8 weeks. But, as they say while I am here I will take any opportunity that presents itself.

To that end I am looking to find information about any company or organisation in the field of UX (User Experience) or manufacturing mobile technology to see. I will also be looking to see if there is any alignment with any government body as well.


More details will follow as I make contacts in Singapore.