Is it possible to entrust the design of the product to the external studio: annual results
A year ago, our article " Hiring VS Outsourcing (in small business projects) " was discussed at Habré about whether it’s better to hire employees or take companies to outsource. In the article, our CEO told us that we had been looking for a balance between hiring and contracting for a long time, and as a result, we found an excellent contracting studio in the design issue.
On August 30, 2012, we launched our service, and it caused quite a heated discussion and interest from the Internet community and the media. Many remember our temporary cap, about the history of the creation of which and the girl depicted on it to Lena, we somehow tell you separately:
')
This time we decided to share our experience with a separate company, to which we entrusted design and usability issues, as well as how we created this product for a whole year together with the Malgini design and web development studio (Techinform LLC) and what from this ultimately happened.
According to the results we will try to answer the question: can the system design be given to a third-party company, is it too important to trust its external team?
The user interface is what everyone sees who tries to work in the final product. This is exactly the "clothes" for which they meet. And if a person can make the very first impression simply by the appearance and quality of graphics, after a few minutes of work his focus will shift to the convenience and simplicity of the interface. Spoiled by Apple and other companies, users today do not want to learn, read the instructions; they want everything to just work and be comfortable.
In this regard, we can distinguish at least the following requirements for a modern interface. He must:
1. evoke positive emotions;
2. be comfortable for work;
3. not to require (as far as possible) training;
4. to distinguish the system from the rest;
5. to adapt to the various devices with which the user works - from a laptop to a smartphone.
It turns out that the concept of a good interface simultaneously affects the appearance (design - illustrations, design) and the logic of the user in the system (functionality and usability).
If we were drawing a booklet, the question “can we entrust it to an external design studio” would have a simple answer: of course. In this case, you only need to formulate the thoughts that we want to convey to the reader of the booklet, and a good illustrator will make a perfectly designed layout from the first or second attempt.
And what about the interface design? How does the magic that the user considers "simplicity and convenience" is born?
You can build the process of working with a designer contractor in at least the following ways:
1. Designers participate in all discussions of new features of the system, offer their solutions and, in fact, influence the functionality of the system in a very direct way, almost merging with the team. At the same time, they should have an understanding of the purpose of creating the system, specific tasks, their significance, etc. This leads to the fact that they spend a lot of time, we begin to depend on them (on our contractors!) And do not have to make decisions without coordinating with them.
2. The project team comes up with new functions and determines the answers to the questions “which scenarios of using functions by users”, “how to make functions simple and understandable to the user”, “how each function is interconnected with others”, that is, the algorithms of the users, needs, etc. . Then these requirements are sent to designers who find solutions in terms of usability and make changes to the system layout, adding the necessary functions.
3. The project team comes up with everything entirely, thinking also for the designers, and instructs the latter only on the issue of appearance design.
Each of these methods may be suitable for different cases, the degree of involvement of an external company, the cost of its services, etc. To determine the best option, we tried all three options for work, and in our case, the results were as follows.
When we tried to attract designers working in an external company to all discussions and negotiations, the designers became a deterrent to the development of the project, since meetings were often held unplanned in identifying the problem, and designers other than us had other projects and customers, and they could not request, leaving all the cases, start discussing the system with us. The meetings began to be postponed, we were all nervous, and as a result the sediment remained both in our own and in the design studio. It also led to an increase in the timing of work.
Then we tried to go for the third option, as the fastest and most effective from our point of view, and faced the problem that instead of a simple and easy interface, a large clumsy monster began to turn out, as if it was created by a large corporation in the 90s. Yes, I wanted to lick all the icons, but the overall impression of the system became more and more depressing. Moreover, the designers themselves began to hint that they would not want to use such a system in their work and, as a result, mentioning them among the interface developers is not a good idea. As you know, success has many parents; failure is always an orphan. This was partly due to the fact that when programmers create any system, it turns out that the system for programmers is complex, powerful, but incomprehensible to the average user. The reasons for this are dealt with in detail in the book “The mental hospital in the hands of the patient” by Alan Cooper.
Then we finally found a middle ground, and built the process of working together like this.
All key members of the team who participated in the formation of requirements and product development strategies, got acquainted with the literature, articles and websites on usability and design, in order to get a general understanding of the principles of operation of convenient systems. Of particular note is the book by Jeff Raskin "Interfaces: New Directions in the Design of Computer Systems." This preparation made the process of communication with the external design studio much faster, we began to speak almost the same language.
Our team wrote out a list of those functions that it considered absolutely necessary, described them in as detailed a way as it considered necessary, and passed on the description to the designers. The guys from Malgini looked, discussed inside themselves, asked their colleagues, showed them to their neighbors and friends - and wrote a list of 10-20 comments and suggestions about what they like and what, in their opinion, requires serious improvement. After that, we held a scheduled meeting on Skype and, going through a list of disagreements and questions prepared on both sides, we quickly found all the answers that satisfied both parties. Satisfied dispersed, designers designed the result, programmers implemented it - and a new version of the interface was obtained.
For us, this approach has become the most effective.
First, it turned out that the speed of thought and the depth of abstract thinking of analysts are fundamentally different from those of designers. If you “torment” a designer and shake ideas out of it, nothing is good, as is always the case with creativity, it doesn't work. But if you clearly understand the final goal, then give freedom to criticize and modify it, then the creative talent of the designers is included, and they with redoubled force take up discussion and refinement, offering sometimes such cool ideas that without such a “creative pause” we would never did not think of it before.
Secondly, the designers acted as the first users who tested our ideas "for lice." They helped to skip several iterations and immediately do the functions quite well.
Thirdly, the designers got the right to uphold their ideas, and this greatly influenced the final product: having an excellent understanding of usability and a sense of taste, they spent their time on persuasion (and did not take our demands at face value), for which we are very grateful .
1. We found out that in order to create a convenient and beautiful interface, designers should be “sick” for the project no less than the team members. That is, if you simply outsource the design, writing requirements in a beautiful brand book (which in principle is unrealistic for a startup creating and re-creating his product several times a year), you get a “dead design” without a soul. You severely limit the flight of imagination to designers and reduce the degree of their influence on the result - and this is impossible with creative people. The result is sad.
2. Working with an external design company turned out to be very effective, including because the designers continued to work on the projects of other customers, and they didn’t have an eye on them, and also because they were able to play the role of “beaters” of our ideas. . If an idea is born “at the same table”, people are psychologically inclined to agree with the general opinion, and such a good and sincere test of ideas does not occur.
3. Attempting to pay "for each unit of work" harmed the project. Payment by the hour very strained us and relaxed designers, and payment for each module led to the complication of requests for refinement of the already created. For example, over the year we have redrawn the icons within the system five times - and if we paid money for it every time, now everything would have looked much worse. As a result, it was decided to switch to the payment model “according to the technical task for a period of time”, where for the entire period (two weeks) there was a fixed price. This option turned out to be the most correct for us and allowed us to create a trusting relationship between the teams.
As a result, we were all very pleased with the results, and when starting the system, we all “rooted” for it, without having slept the night. We did not have to ask for it - the guys from Malgini felt responsibility and involvement, and acted as team members.
In conclusion, let's try to answer the question “can the system design be given to a third-party company, is it not too important to trust its external team”?
Our experience has shown that such a model of work can be very effective and pleasant, if we build the process of work between companies correctly, and partially involve an external company in the process of designing the system itself, and not just the interface.
The fact that the design was given to an external company had its undeniable advantages - testing our hypotheses, attracting foreign experience from other projects, reducing costs.
Thanks to just such a scheme of work, we managed to create a fundamentally new, simple and convenient interface - using layers instead of windows, one for desktops and tablets, light and pleasant. Malgini convinced us to remove some functions from the system; some, on the contrary, add, for which we are, of course, very grateful.
Only one mystery remains for us: how do some other development companies outsource the development of interface design to external companies without such close cooperation?
We will be happy to answer your questions in order to clarify in more detail our principles of work.
PS A detailed presentation of the unique interface elements that we found during the development can be viewed on the one and a half hour video presentation in RIA Novosti here , and the Unicloud Business 365 system itself is available here .
On August 30, 2012, we launched our service, and it caused quite a heated discussion and interest from the Internet community and the media. Many remember our temporary cap, about the history of the creation of which and the girl depicted on it to Lena, we somehow tell you separately:
')
This time we decided to share our experience with a separate company, to which we entrusted design and usability issues, as well as how we created this product for a whole year together with the Malgini design and web development studio (Techinform LLC) and what from this ultimately happened.
According to the results we will try to answer the question: can the system design be given to a third-party company, is it too important to trust its external team?
Interface Requirements
The user interface is what everyone sees who tries to work in the final product. This is exactly the "clothes" for which they meet. And if a person can make the very first impression simply by the appearance and quality of graphics, after a few minutes of work his focus will shift to the convenience and simplicity of the interface. Spoiled by Apple and other companies, users today do not want to learn, read the instructions; they want everything to just work and be comfortable.
In this regard, we can distinguish at least the following requirements for a modern interface. He must:
1. evoke positive emotions;
2. be comfortable for work;
3. not to require (as far as possible) training;
4. to distinguish the system from the rest;
5. to adapt to the various devices with which the user works - from a laptop to a smartphone.
It turns out that the concept of a good interface simultaneously affects the appearance (design - illustrations, design) and the logic of the user in the system (functionality and usability).
If we were drawing a booklet, the question “can we entrust it to an external design studio” would have a simple answer: of course. In this case, you only need to formulate the thoughts that we want to convey to the reader of the booklet, and a good illustrator will make a perfectly designed layout from the first or second attempt.
And what about the interface design? How does the magic that the user considers "simplicity and convenience" is born?
Collaboration methods
You can build the process of working with a designer contractor in at least the following ways:
1. Designers participate in all discussions of new features of the system, offer their solutions and, in fact, influence the functionality of the system in a very direct way, almost merging with the team. At the same time, they should have an understanding of the purpose of creating the system, specific tasks, their significance, etc. This leads to the fact that they spend a lot of time, we begin to depend on them (on our contractors!) And do not have to make decisions without coordinating with them.
2. The project team comes up with new functions and determines the answers to the questions “which scenarios of using functions by users”, “how to make functions simple and understandable to the user”, “how each function is interconnected with others”, that is, the algorithms of the users, needs, etc. . Then these requirements are sent to designers who find solutions in terms of usability and make changes to the system layout, adding the necessary functions.
3. The project team comes up with everything entirely, thinking also for the designers, and instructs the latter only on the issue of appearance design.
Each of these methods may be suitable for different cases, the degree of involvement of an external company, the cost of its services, etc. To determine the best option, we tried all three options for work, and in our case, the results were as follows.
How we tried different working methods
When we tried to attract designers working in an external company to all discussions and negotiations, the designers became a deterrent to the development of the project, since meetings were often held unplanned in identifying the problem, and designers other than us had other projects and customers, and they could not request, leaving all the cases, start discussing the system with us. The meetings began to be postponed, we were all nervous, and as a result the sediment remained both in our own and in the design studio. It also led to an increase in the timing of work.
Then we tried to go for the third option, as the fastest and most effective from our point of view, and faced the problem that instead of a simple and easy interface, a large clumsy monster began to turn out, as if it was created by a large corporation in the 90s. Yes, I wanted to lick all the icons, but the overall impression of the system became more and more depressing. Moreover, the designers themselves began to hint that they would not want to use such a system in their work and, as a result, mentioning them among the interface developers is not a good idea. As you know, success has many parents; failure is always an orphan. This was partly due to the fact that when programmers create any system, it turns out that the system for programmers is complex, powerful, but incomprehensible to the average user. The reasons for this are dealt with in detail in the book “The mental hospital in the hands of the patient” by Alan Cooper.
Then we finally found a middle ground, and built the process of working together like this.
All key members of the team who participated in the formation of requirements and product development strategies, got acquainted with the literature, articles and websites on usability and design, in order to get a general understanding of the principles of operation of convenient systems. Of particular note is the book by Jeff Raskin "Interfaces: New Directions in the Design of Computer Systems." This preparation made the process of communication with the external design studio much faster, we began to speak almost the same language.
Our team wrote out a list of those functions that it considered absolutely necessary, described them in as detailed a way as it considered necessary, and passed on the description to the designers. The guys from Malgini looked, discussed inside themselves, asked their colleagues, showed them to their neighbors and friends - and wrote a list of 10-20 comments and suggestions about what they like and what, in their opinion, requires serious improvement. After that, we held a scheduled meeting on Skype and, going through a list of disagreements and questions prepared on both sides, we quickly found all the answers that satisfied both parties. Satisfied dispersed, designers designed the result, programmers implemented it - and a new version of the interface was obtained.
For us, this approach has become the most effective.
First, it turned out that the speed of thought and the depth of abstract thinking of analysts are fundamentally different from those of designers. If you “torment” a designer and shake ideas out of it, nothing is good, as is always the case with creativity, it doesn't work. But if you clearly understand the final goal, then give freedom to criticize and modify it, then the creative talent of the designers is included, and they with redoubled force take up discussion and refinement, offering sometimes such cool ideas that without such a “creative pause” we would never did not think of it before.
Secondly, the designers acted as the first users who tested our ideas "for lice." They helped to skip several iterations and immediately do the functions quite well.
Thirdly, the designers got the right to uphold their ideas, and this greatly influenced the final product: having an excellent understanding of usability and a sense of taste, they spent their time on persuasion (and did not take our demands at face value), for which we are very grateful .
What else did we learn?
1. We found out that in order to create a convenient and beautiful interface, designers should be “sick” for the project no less than the team members. That is, if you simply outsource the design, writing requirements in a beautiful brand book (which in principle is unrealistic for a startup creating and re-creating his product several times a year), you get a “dead design” without a soul. You severely limit the flight of imagination to designers and reduce the degree of their influence on the result - and this is impossible with creative people. The result is sad.
2. Working with an external design company turned out to be very effective, including because the designers continued to work on the projects of other customers, and they didn’t have an eye on them, and also because they were able to play the role of “beaters” of our ideas. . If an idea is born “at the same table”, people are psychologically inclined to agree with the general opinion, and such a good and sincere test of ideas does not occur.
3. Attempting to pay "for each unit of work" harmed the project. Payment by the hour very strained us and relaxed designers, and payment for each module led to the complication of requests for refinement of the already created. For example, over the year we have redrawn the icons within the system five times - and if we paid money for it every time, now everything would have looked much worse. As a result, it was decided to switch to the payment model “according to the technical task for a period of time”, where for the entire period (two weeks) there was a fixed price. This option turned out to be the most correct for us and allowed us to create a trusting relationship between the teams.
As a result, we were all very pleased with the results, and when starting the system, we all “rooted” for it, without having slept the night. We did not have to ask for it - the guys from Malgini felt responsibility and involvement, and acted as team members.
So can you trust the design of the external company?
In conclusion, let's try to answer the question “can the system design be given to a third-party company, is it not too important to trust its external team”?
Our experience has shown that such a model of work can be very effective and pleasant, if we build the process of work between companies correctly, and partially involve an external company in the process of designing the system itself, and not just the interface.
The fact that the design was given to an external company had its undeniable advantages - testing our hypotheses, attracting foreign experience from other projects, reducing costs.
Thanks to just such a scheme of work, we managed to create a fundamentally new, simple and convenient interface - using layers instead of windows, one for desktops and tablets, light and pleasant. Malgini convinced us to remove some functions from the system; some, on the contrary, add, for which we are, of course, very grateful.
Only one mystery remains for us: how do some other development companies outsource the development of interface design to external companies without such close cooperation?
We will be happy to answer your questions in order to clarify in more detail our principles of work.
PS A detailed presentation of the unique interface elements that we found during the development can be viewed on the one and a half hour video presentation in RIA Novosti here , and the Unicloud Business 365 system itself is available here .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/157825/
All Articles