"Good design solves problems. Good experience design isn't about good screens, it's about good experiences." (Golden Krishna)
Summary
There are two main discussion points in this book. First is an account of a screen obsessed culture, second is a discussion on alternatives and speculations on what non-screen-based technical solutions might look like. Krishna is particularly concerned by how a concentration of screen based solutions limits our thinking. This focus on the screen has led to a culture where every company, startup or entrepreneur feels an app is necessary for their service, even when this is inappropriate and creates poor user experience. More worryingly, Krishna speculates that using advertising as the primary revenue source incentivizes firms to create poor screen-based technical solutions because this will lead consumers to spend more time on the app.
In general, the alternative solutions Krishna proposes emphasise speed, simplicity and seamlessness. They are what Krishna describes as “typical processes”, which in effect means they have a physical component and offer a neat solution to common problems. A good example of what he’s getting at is the Nest smart thermostat, which can learn and adjust itself based on the routines of the occupants of the home.
A screen culture
Krishna repeatedly emphasizes that we live in a screen orientated culture. He bases this perception on several observations. Today it seems that every business from car manufactures to grocery stores to coffee shops feel compelled to make an app. More subtly though, Krishna observes a change in the language in how our culture discusses interfaces. In the first chapter he comments that our general understanding of the word interface has come to be associated with screen-based interactions with computer systems. Indeed, the job descriptions many firms put out for UX and UI designers are interchangeable. In fact, as Krishna notes, these are two distinct roles; one focuses on interaction between consumers and systems via screen-based behaviours and the other is much broader, encompassing the entire experience of using the system. The fact these jobs are now mostly treated as the same indicates how deeply our interactions with technology are premised on manipulation of a screen.
The reason that Krishna finds this situation so objectionable is that he believes it leads to suboptimal technical solutions. Undeniably there are situations in which screen based interfaces are best, but in limiting our thinking to the screen we are missing out. The classic example he cites of such sloppy thinking is the excruciating experience of unlocking a car with an app. Krishna goes through the process of doing this step by step, making it clear that this “solution” only adds complexity. Far better, is a non-screen based technology such as integrating a simple proximity sensor into the car keys that can automatically unlock the car when the owner is nearby.
However, Krishna not only suggest this is the result of lazy thinking or a herd, in some cases something more insidious could be going on. For better or worse many internet-based businesses use advertising to make money. As a result, the more time customers spend on their site the better for them. This means that firms have an incentive to make less effective interfaces so customers spend longer on their sites. Would Google be more effective without displaying prominent links? Would Facebook or Twitter work better without ads? These are the questions Krishna raises and most consumers would agree that indeed these services would be better without advertising.
Incentives
This topic of balancing business and consumer incentives is an important one. It is obvious that businesses need consumers to survive, this is the position that Krishna takes. But something that is not commented on so much, is that consumers need businesses to provide them with services. Hence why, so long as the service for the most part works, firms can push customers towards suboptimal interfaces that serve their purposes. However perhaps a more balanced approach is possible, where some compromise is made on the experience but the consumer could benefit elsewhere.
Recently I had my own “The Best Interface is no Interface Experience”. I use a store brand card here in Germany to collect points on purchases I make, which I can then be used to buy items offered by their partners (kitchenware for instance). The card has a barcode on the reverse and the most basic way to collect points is to either hand your card to the cashier after he’s done scanning your groceries or scanning it yourself on a barcode reader attached to the till. Over the last couple of years, the firm behind these cards has been pushing its customers to use an app. With the app you can activate various coupons and also activate a barcode for scanning.
I had forgotten my card one day so decided to try out the app. Of course, by the time I activated the app the cashier had scanned all my items and was ready for me to pay. At this point he was unwilling to let me scan the barcode (in Germany cashiers are typically very efficient but not always so friendly). This would seem to be a typical example of Krishna’s argument; with the card everything can be done much more seamlessly than the app.
However, I do think there is a more complicated point here. First, the question is why is the firm pushing customers to use the app rather than the card that works fine. I think partly this is due to the rise of online shopping, the firm wants its customers to experiment with using the card other ways than just scanning it at the end of a shop. Another reason is that I noticed the firm had started to offer a payment service through the app. With the payment service, you can add your bank details to your account and then the app can generate a QR code for payment.
Not a bad idea. This could potentially have the advantage of something like the paywave technology in modern credit cards, it also has the advantage that you can collect points and finally since it’s linked to your bank account the money goes directly out of your account (in Germany credit cards are often frowned upon so I imagine paywave is not as successful as in other countries).
However, there is still the interface issue. I’ve not used the payment method myself, however I was in line when a young fellow in front of me tried to use it. He certainly had a much friendlier cashier than I did, they spent a good 5 minutes trying to get either the self-scanner or the cashiers scanner to recognize the code. Having used paywave myself (I am not skeptical about credit cards) I can say that this experience was much worse. However despite the interface issues I do think this is potentially a very good service.
In the end I think this firm is really trying to diversify their service and offering a payment scheme is potentially quite lucrative. On the other side consumers have the possibility of paying for small transaction in a neat way without having to use a credit card. Sure maybe the user experience is not great but compromise on the experience might be worth it.