Catalyst and Jefferson Partner for the Redesign of Jefferson.edu
Catalyst is proud and excited to congratulate Jefferson on the launch of its suite of both redesigned and newly designed sites, which includes:
The Jefferson enterprise site (jefferson.edu)
The Thomas Jefferson University site (jefferson.edu/university),
The Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals site (hospitals.jefferson.edu),
The Jefferson Physicians site (http://physicians.jefferson.edu/),
The Jefferson Philanthropy site (http://connect.jefferson.edu/s/1399/start.aspx), and
The Jefferson Innovation site (http://innovation.jefferson.edu/).
Jefferson and Catalyst’s close, productive partnership allowed for the development of a fully responsive platform that celebrates Jefferson’s unification as an esteemed health care institution -- one that excels and continues to innovate in the areas of patient care, education and research. Catalyst and Jefferson collaborated together on research, strategy, interaction design and visual design, and are continuing to team up for future phased roll-outs of the sites.
“Kill Lorem Ipsum” is one of the five items listed in Dan Willis’ blog post “Five Things Every UX Designer Should Do Well”. Whether or not designers can kill lorem ipsum “well” is beside the point, according to a few Catalytes, who shared and discussed their own take on the topic.
Chris:
I disagree that "Lorem ipsum...and other for-placement-only nonsense text is the designer’s way of saying 'I haven’t really thought through this content, so you know, whatever'.” In wireframes, lorem ipsum is to copy what gray boxes are to images -- they're simply placeholders intended to focus the client's attention on the big picture.
Janine:
When doing user research we try not to ask users to respond to a screen with placeholder text. One reason is that we have no idea what the person expects to appear in these areas, and we run the risk of misinterpreting their feedback.
Similarly the client can't accurately respond to our designs without a sense of what we envision would be there. I know we often have to wait for clients to provide real textual content, but you must have some idea of what belongs there or you wouldn't be able to properly design the page. It seems easy enough to find representative text that illustrates your assumptions.
Even if you get off track talking about the text with the client, it will give you an opportunity to learn more about what's in their heads, or even to uncover a lack of alignment on the client team, which is always better done earlier rather than later.
Ray:
I think it depends on the audience for the document (wireframe for developers, prototype for user testing, comp for stakeholder presentation, etc.). In some cases I think either dummy text or "real" copy could be distracting.
Generally speaking, I agree with Chris in that it's not simply “I haven’t really thought through this content, so you know, whatever.” Sometimes it's a waste of time and effort to construct copy. That said, I try to use real words whenever I can. When I have time I even like to have some fun with it.
My biggest problem with this list item is that it lays down a seemingly arbitrary rule, and assumes that people who don't follow it are being lazy.
Meredith:
I agree with everyone here. It's critical not to have lorem ipsum in designs that are about to be tested. Whether or not I use lorem ipsum depends on whether it's easy to find representative text online or not. Often it's actually more confusing to the client or research participant to put in faux text that isn't genuine copy.
What I typically do is use the space to describe the content that should go there, but also include at least one word of lorem so it's clear that it's placeholder.
For instance, for text in a promo box, I would write:
Very brief sentence explaining what the article is about lorem ipsum.
For paragraph text, I would write:
Short paragraphs here about why this product is better than other products lorem ipsum dolor sit amet lorem ipsum dolor sit amet lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
To me, this has the convenience of lorem ipsum while still conveying thought and intent. It also saves me writing extensive content for items in the design that might not even survive another iteration.
Should UX designers “kill” lorem ipsum? Whatever the answer, we hope that “Samuel L. Ipsum” is exempt from the threat.
After living and working in the New York area for some time, people understand how to find their way around the legendary New York subway system.
What may seem frightening and overwhelming to newcomers is second nature to those of us who get it; however, anyone traveling to a new city -- any city with a subway -- will probably experience the anxiety of reading and navigating the often unclear maps that are meant to communicate the workings of the city's subway system.
Over the past few years, Jug Cerovic has been working to alleviate the confusion that is born from the jumble of winding lines and hidden labels that make up most subway maps. Cerovic simplified the map experience by enlarging city centers to provide room for displaying the lines and stations that exist there. He also chose to use more uniform colors, symbols and labeling on his maps.
As always, we love seeing designs that simplify people's lives. After all, that's why we love working in UX. Take a look at Cerovic's maps -- you might want to keep them in mind the next time you travel.
You’ve seen them before: the little pop-up boxes that appear on websites you visit, inviting you to take a survey of some sort. Depending on your availability, interest in the site, or desire to procrastinate, you may have taken the time to fill one out.
If you’re like most people, that’s where your experience will end. But, what happens with all of that data? We’ll shed some light on what is happening behind the scenes when you see that survey invitation, or “site intercept”, and why you may consider taking advantage of a site intercept for your next project.
Here at Catalyst, we’ve used site intercept surveys for a variety of reasons, but we’ve seen two common scenarios for using this methodology:
First, site intercept surveys are a great jumping-off point for larger research projects. Clients often have an idea of the types of people who are visiting their site and what those people might think of the current experience, but these assumptions haven't been validated or validated recently.
The survey data can be used to uncover critical insights about visitors such as demographics, satisfaction with the site, and impressions of the brand. Armed with this information, researchers can make more informed decisions about where to focus more rigorous lines of inquiry and use the insights to drive design strategy.
The second scenario for using a site intercept survey happens when researchers need to validate design changes through “benchmarking” metrics. By launching surveys before and after a site redesign, we can gauge the success of the redesign and even identify areas for improvement.
Benchmarking surveys commonly include questions aimed at understanding visitors’ satisfaction with the site, ease of use and perceptions of content. By using the same questions on both the pre-and post- redesign versions of the site, researchers can track whether the design updates moved the site in the right direction.
Site intercept surveys are an increasingly important tool in the UX researcher’s toolkit because:
Researchers are able to target current customers / site visitors in real-time
Researchers can elicit feedback from hundreds of users instead of just the 10-12 participants that might participate in a lab study
(Bonus:) All this can be done for a fraction of the cost of most research techniques
If you want a more in-depth look at site intercept surveys, stay tuned for the webinar Catalyst is hosting on the topic in May!
A few of us attended the Interaction14 conference in Amsterdam this February. The event was packed with tons of interesting people, and we had the opportunity to hear some thought-provoking talks and to attend workshops that got us inspired to approach projects in some new, interesting ways.
Luckily, many of the talks that were presented at Interaction14 are available in video form on the conference’s website. Since it could be tedious to go through all of these videos, we thought we’d share some of our favorites:
"Human Interaction: Physical and Virtual", Stephanie Akkauoui Hughes
Stephanie Akkauoui Hughes shares how, as an architect, she doesn’t design for interactions but for the context of these interactions. This means designing a building or space with a focus on how people are actually living and moving through the space separately and together. By involving customers throughout the design process -- while the design is incomplete, impermanent, and imperfect -- we allow the context to emerge, and we can adapt our designs to facilitate interactions within that context.
"Body Languages of Interaction Design", Irene Au
As interaction and visual designers, we’re trained in the principles and theories that guide design. Irene Au’s talk encourages us to take that a step further and consider what facilitates focus, empathy and creativity. While we've always acknowledged these mindsets are essential, it’s her approach on unleashing these different perspectives is fresh and motivating. Irene has recommendations for different meditation and yoga practices that have proven to help bring out each of these qualities.
"Food = interaction", Bernard Lahousse
Designers often find themselves hemming and hawing over seemingly similar visual layout options. Should I make this font a little bigger, or a tad bolder? What about adding just a touch more padding around this button? Designer or not, you might wonder if all the thought that goes into these decisions really makes a difference. Through his demonstrations with food interactions, Bernard Lahousse helped us to see that, yes, these subtle changes can completely transform an experience.
"The Executioner's Tale", Christina Wodtke
When tackling new design challenges as a team, it’s important everyone understands the plan and is able to observe what is and is not working. In this video, Christina Wodtke shares tools and techniques, such as “OKRs” (Objectives, Key Results), that she uses to give teams direction and maintain accountability. She discusses valuable methods for keeping various team members up-to-date on task statuses, ensuring a more efficient process.
Here at Catalyst, we pride ourselves on having a community of diverse opinions and perspectives. Often, our practitioners will bring their unique viewpoints and experiences that stem from their personal interests to the projects we work on.
Recently, Catalyte and UX Designer Chelsey Delaney had the opportunity to combine two of her passions, humor and UX design, to provide some first-of-its-kind commentary on the intersection of the two.
Chelsey’s insights can be found in The Encyclopedia of Humor Studies, which Sage Publications released this week. This massive, two-volume reference book comprehensively documents humor: its history, its role in society, its conceptual identity on an international scale and research to-date about its form and function in a variety of different disciplines and fields.
Given the large price tag, we can’t blame anyone for not placing an Amazon order anytime soon. But, if you get a chance to check it out, we bet you won’t be disappointed.
“How to Better Handle the Stress of UX Work” Talk at RE:DESIGN
Stress. It’s an insidious problem of the modern work world.
For user experience professionals, whose designs are constantly under debate and scrutiny, and who have frequent deadlines and presentations in which it’s important to impress, daily working life can become quite stressful. The pressure can have adverse effects on our work and personal well-being, so it’s critical to find ways to both prevent and alleviate stress.
Our very own Director of Interaction Design, Meredith Noble, will be leading a discussion at the RE:DESIGN UXD conference in Brooklyn that will identify key sources of stress for UX professionals as well as ways of preventing and coping with it. Come join her and others in the UX field as they discuss this very important topic!
11 Guidelines for Establishing a Client-Friendly Project Approach
I recently had a less than positive experience with the manager of a service vendor we work with.
It wasn't over-the-top bad, but it was bad enough to reinforce my sense that the vendor has a problematic workplace culture. It really got me thinking about ineffective ways to deal with clients, which helped me to focus on more effective ways. At Catalyst, this is what anyone who occupies the Project Owner (PO) role tries to foster -- I'm not saying we have all the answers, but I think we're on the right track.
Here is a list of guidelines to follow for managing clients effectively and with positivity, particularly from the perspective of a PO:
Validate expectations: When making a quote or describing a deliverable, validate your client’s understanding of what they can expect you to provide. It’s important to make sure you have at least the same general idea of what you are going to do for them. If there is more than one option, ask the client to describe not only which option they are choosing, but also why they’re making a particular choice. This will allow you to address any misunderstandings before they become a problem.
Prepare for discussions: When going into a potentially tense conversation or negotiation, make sure you understand the complete history of the issue as well as other important information. Talk with your team to understand what has been said and done by people on both the client team and on your own team. Read relevant emails, but also make sure to read between the lines for any unspoken assumptions or insinuations. Then, if you discover you don’t have all the facts, put the discussion on hold and make it clear why you’re doing so.
Avoid internal griping: Even if it's impossible for the client to hear what you’re saying, talking about them negatively will undermine the relationship. By fostering negative attitudes you are simply strengthening a sense of adversity in your own mind. This us-vs.-them perspective will create an unconscious undercurrent. It will diminish your team’s commitment to the project, resulting in a shoddier product.
Set expectations: Though it’s fine to over-deliver (and sometimes you should), make sure to tell the client they’re not getting a typical deliverable. It's important to explain to them why you’ve done so, and also to give them a clear example of what is typical.
Maintain the long view: Even if a client seems like they may be asking a lot of questions, or it seems like they are generally high-maintenance, it may be an indication that they are simply struggling to understand something. The fact they’re willing to invest the time to clarify may mean they see the potential for future relations, and they want to ensure they are starting with an accurate understanding of your process, deliverables, experience, etc.
Accept responsibility: Never place blame on the client, or even imply that something was their fault. They are well aware of their actions, and are possibly feeling a bit sensitive about taking blame. There’s nothing to be gained from pointing out their role in a misunderstanding. There are always two parties in a miscommunication, and it is always possible to do a better job of listening and explaining.
Be flexible: Remain open to potential opportunities to create a positive relationship. No two client relationships are the same, nor should they be. Just because this one doesn’t fall into your pre-conceived notion of what the project should or could be, don’t try to make it conform to your expectations. Something more interesting and satisfying might evolve that you could never have anticipated, but that definitely cannot happen if you are too rigid.
Be transparent: If you do make a mistake, or see a deadline slipping, let the client know right away. It’s human nature to be optimistic, hoping that the client won’t notice or that a lagging project phase will turn around at the last minute. It’s much better to be up-front about any challenges you are encountering. The client will appreciate your willingness to be honest. It’s much better for them to know what's happening than to be left wondering whether you will be on time or deliver the quality they anticipate.
Be inclusive: Reinforce the understanding that you are working together as a team, both internally and with the client. Rather than refer to people on your team by name, use the terms “us” and “we”, and talk about “the team”, which is inclusive of both your own colleagues and the client’s. This will support a sense of mutual responsibility and joint engagement.
Seek criticism: Don’t be afraid of feedback. If you think you are intuiting a potential client misunderstanding, follow your intuition and check in with the client. Ask open-ended questions and gently probe if you feel they are holding back anything potentially negative. It may take more effort, but listen for subtle reservations and clues. It’s better to uncover a problem and address it earlier than to let it grow and have it come back at you from an unanticipated direction later.
Make an appearance: It’s much easier to fall back on phone calls, or worse yet emails, to try resolve issues or clarify misunderstandings. Expend the effort to make personal contact if at all possible. Not only will you be sending the message that you care enough to make the effort, but the client will have the opportunity to see the sincerity behind your words.
LeanUX NYC 2014 is coming up fast! The conference kicks off Thurs., April 10 and wraps up Sat., April 12 at the Westin Hotel in Jersey City. You won't want to miss it, as this year's schedule is another beaut'.
And, since you won't be missing it, be sure to check out some talks and workshops from our fellow Catalytes:
TALK: "Is Bad Research Better Than No Research: Doing LeanUX Right"
Deidre Kolarick, Director of Research @ Catalyst Group
Thurs., April 10, 2 p.m. - 2:20 p.m.
WORKSHOP: "How To Do Lean Research Right"
Deidre Kolarick, Director of Research @ Catalyst Group
Fri., April 11, 9 a.m. - 12 p.m.
WORKSHOP: "Show Me What You're Thinking"
Ray DeLaPena, Director of Strategy @ Catalyst Group
Fri., April 11, 9 a.m. - 12 p.m.
WORKSHOP: "Enhancing Proto-Personas With Characterizations"
Chelsey Delaney, UX Designer @ Catalyst Group
Sat., April 12, 1 p.m. - 4 p.m.
Don't have your ticket yet? Why not get it with a discount? Use code #LeanUXSpeaker to get 20% off.
Automate Communication to Spend More Time With the Bros
This hilarious post on Jezebel talks about a new app for self-identified bros who don't want to waste time communicating with their girlfriends.
With BroApp, bros no longer need to spend countless minutes laboring over tedious girlfriend texts because they can farm them out to an automated system that generates gems such as, "Hey darl, thinking of your face."
It sounds like a Saturday Night Live sketch but apparently it's a real thing that people (bros) use? I would LOVE to do some research on this. From the article it sounds like BroApp has some legit(ish) UX issues, the most pressing of which is that it creeps girls out.
“We humans are full of unpredictable emotions that logic cannot solve."
- Captain James T. Kirk
“When it comes to conducting user research, everyone thinks they are Spock but in reality most of us are actually more like Kirk.”
- Deidre Kolarick
At Catalyst Group we are big fans of Lean UX. We especially like the tight integration of design and research practices that differentiates lean methods from more traditional waterfall design processes.
In Lean UX, user research powers the “build, measure, learn” cycle that forms the core of lean thinking. Lean UX also strongly advocates that all members of the product development team (not just researchers) should regularly GOOB (“get out of the building”) to speak with actual customers and observe their interactions with a product or prototype.
The value of this firsthand experience is twofold: First, it shortens the learning cycle by eliminating the time spent on preparing, distributing, and presenting research reports. Second, it produces better alignment across the whole team about what customers want and need.
There’s no question that all team members can benefit from the first-hand experience of user research. However, if the research is conducted by individuals without training or experience, there is a significant risk that the results will be misleading or inaccurate. This doesn’t mean that all research must be conducted by an outside researcher in order to be valid. But, like any other skill, there are right ways and wrong ways to do it. Lean teams that seek rapid validation to support product iteration can’t afford poorly executed research that leads to unsupported conclusions.
Realistically, however, many small teams don’t include trained researchers and can’t afford to hire external experts to oversee that the research is done properly. Should these teams skip user research entirely (or do much less of it) and just plow ahead based on their own instincts and other analytics? Is it better to do no research than do it poorly? This is the question that Deidre confronted in her talk.
Some of Deidre’s observations are somewhat controversial in the Lean UX world because they advocate an approach to research that involves more formal training than is generally assumed in the lean context. Even so, there is no arguing with the fact that human beings are subject to certain biases and tendencies that can cloud our judgment when it comes to gathering and interpreting user feedback. Drawing on her academic background (a PhD in cognitive psychology), Deidre shed some light on the types of biases that may impact lean user research and offered many tactical ideas for overcoming these obstacles. Throughout her discussion Deidre cautioned the audience about the importance of asking questions in the right way and letting users speak for themselves to generate insights a lean team needs to make smart product decisions.
Luckily, the whole talk was recorded, so you’ll be able to hear for yourself what Deidre had to share. This talk is useful for anyone conducting or participating in user research, whether or not your team is following a lean approach.
Presenter: Deidre Kolarick, Director, Research & Insights
Register Here!
What’s the difference between field research and lab testing? When might you want to use a site intercept to learn about your target audience? Is ‘shadowing’ something to do off the basketball court? In this talk, Deidre will provide an introduction to the catalog of research methods we use to gain insights about the user experience. Using the framework of a product lifecycle, we discuss which methods are most appropriate depending on the project constraints and insights desired.
Techniques include:
Contextual interviews
Shadowing
Co-design workshops
Diary studies
Card sorting
Tree testing
User research (moderated and unmoderated)
Site intercept
Field research
We’ll describe these techniques and the value each can bring to the product development lifecycle, then highlight case studies where these methods were used to effectively deliver insights above and beyond what was expected. We’ll also review several metrics that can be used to benchmark performance, a critical step to ensuring that design changes continually improve the user experience.
Who should attend?
This talk will be a basic introduction to some of the research methods that we use here at Catalyst Group. It’s geared towards people with a basic knowledge of user experience design who are interested in learning more about the benefits of research. If you’re not sure if this is right for you, here are some questions you can ask yourself:
Do I suspect that my website / app / interface isn’t performing as well as it could be?
Have I attended meetings and pondered what “user research” is or why we’re doing it?
Am I always looking for the best way to understand my target audience?
Has it been a few years since I was involved in a research project (and to be honest, I’m feeling a little rusty about getting back into this type of work)?
Do I feel like I’m stuck in a rut with my current research tactics?
Do I want to find out about new ways to improve my product and learn what my users are looking for?
Am I ready to add some excitement to the research conversation?
If you answered “yes” to any of these questions then this webinar is for you! Are you still on-the-fence about attending? Send Kelly a note at [email protected] to learn more.
Meet Deidre Kolarick
Deidre is Director of Research & Insights at Catalyst Group in New York City, where she is responsible for all research projects for clients and for the development of new methods for conducting user research. She holds a PhD. in cognitive psychology from Yale University. She is also an adjunct professor of psychology at New York University, a tennis addict, and a triathlete.
The Pebble smartwatch was originally introduced via a very successful Kickstarter campaign (they raised $100,000 in two hours). As with the Samsung Galaxy Gear, the Pebble does not stand alone -- it works in conjunction with a bluetooth-capable smartphone. So, in essence, it is an auxiliary screen for my phone.
My initial reaction to this was… “Meh.” However, after wearing the thing for a few weeks my tune has changed.
I’m sure smartwatches will hit their stride in a few years but I like to ride the early part of the wave. I’m usually the guy people ask to help them set up such devices, so I gotta know what I’m doing. So I set out to find out everything the Pebble could do, and that’s a lot (in theory).
The Pebble platform is just that, it’s a platform. They distribute a free SDK and a good number of developers are on board. There are apps to use FourSquare and Yelp, a remote control for your GoPro camera and more. Almost out of the box you can control the music on your smartphone, read email, read and even send text messages, check the weather, track runs, get sports scores. Oh, and you can change your watch face.
For me, and for now, none of these apps really fulfills any kind of promise. The ability to interact with the interface is just not there yet. On the Pebble, the screen is not touch-enabled as the Galaxy Gear is, but I don’t suspect that’s the problem. I just don’t think we yet know how to effectively design high (or medium) degrees of interaction on such a small screen, on our wrist. I believe we’ll get there but the Pebble isn’t there and, from what I’m reading and hearing, the Galaxy Gear isn’t either.
So why and how has my tune changed? It’s very simple… the Pebble grants me a little (tiny) bit of freedom from my phone. And, that’s significant. As someone who remembers life before smartphones (even before cell phones) I can appreciate just how much I’m connected to that thing. I'm not a high volume texter, but I get messages throughout the day, and often in situations where I don’t want to pull out my phone. The ability to glance at my wrist and see if it’s at all important, and even be able to read it if it is, without having to pull out my phone is actually a big deal. And to me, it's enough to be really excited about the possibilities of wrist/glance based interactions.
Sure, maybe someday I’ll be talking to my watch to compose messages or having video chats on it, but then it’s turning into a smaller smartphone on my wrist. The only thing I gain is not needing to take it out of my pocket.
For me, the present, and maybe even the future, of smartwatches is at-a-glance value. Give me more time to look up and around while still being connected, not quicker access and a smaller screen to touch and stare at.
The Pebble does this. Thank you, Pebble.
Last week Catalyst hosted a portfolio critique night for some alumni of General Assembly's (GA) UX courses. Three alumni submitted mock applications to Catalyst, each of which included a cover letter and a carefully crafted UX portfolio. Catalytes provided unfiltered feedback with the perspective of hiring managers on each whole submission package.
It was an extremely rewarding evening -- Catalyst got to meet some of the best and brightest of the new crop of UXers, while alumni received a unique look behind the scenes at what happens during the portfolio review process.
Catalyst shared the following tips with alums prior to the critique:
1. Show how you have solved problems:
Your process
Challenges you’ve encountered and your solutions for them
Your role in the team, if applicable
2. If you’re including a mock project, explain your design brief or the project constraints (goals, users, platform, etc.). If your mock project didn’t have any constraints, provide rationale for your decisions.
3. It’s common to organize a portfolio by project, but showing samples grouped by type of activity is also a good presentation method to consider (e.g., information architecture, flows, wireframes).
4. Ensure your portfolio is multi-purpose. Remember it will be used during two key steps of the hiring process:
As something to persuade a potential employer to interview you
As something to discuss during your interview
5. Put yourself into it. Show what you stand for, and who you are as a designer. Remember that the hiring manager will look at the portfolio at different levels:
The quality of the designs contained within the portfolio (e.g., Are they quality designs? Do they demonstrate strong knowledge of UX principles?)
The quality of the deliverables that contain the designs (e.g., Is it easy to follow? Is there attention to styling? Are the annotations clear and concise? How good a vehicle for the design is the document?)
The quality of the user experience of the portfolio (e.g., Is it easy to browse and give a hiring manager enough information to judge your work?)
Other advice given during the critiques included:
Cover Letters
1. Tailor your cover letter to the organization you're applying to. Make sure that you mention how you learn of them, why you think you'd be a good fit, and what you can bring to the company.
2. Some hiring managers care about cover letters, others don't. For those who care, ensure your cover letter is well-written and contains enough information to get a sense of who you are and what you offer.
3. Ensure you mention your portfolio explicitly in your cover letter -- don't make a prospective employer hunt for the link in your signature.
Website vs. PDF Portfolios
1. If you apply with both a PDF portfolio and have additional portfolio details on your website, ensure they sync up. Insert links from the PDF to relevant parts of your website, or forgo a PDF portfolio entirely and just use a website.
General Advice
1. It's always great to do something that makes you memorable. Be creative, but ensure that the creativity doesn't get in the way of the usefulness or usability of your portfolio design.
2. Pay close attention to the details and overall aesthetics of your portfolio. Your attention to detail and design will be noticed.
3. Where possible, include results. If you talk about steps in a design process or user research and show the final result, talk about how it was received and what you learned.
4. Don't just show screenshots of design iterations -- include details of what you changed at each iteration and why.
5. Ensure the screenshots in your portfolio are of a high enough quality for potential employers to see the details of the design.
6. If you're transitioning to UX from another field, that's great! Talk about how your past experiences translate to UX skills.
7. Design your portfolio with "progressive disclosure" in mind: Allow prospective employers to skim the surface to get a sense of what you have done, but also give them a way to learn more if they desire.
8. Make sure you are present in the communications and portfolio as well. Expose how you think, who you are, and a bit of your personality.
9. If you focus on specific skills, show examples of those skills from multiple projects if you can.
10. Don’t make the reviewer hunt through several case studies to see artifacts of a particular type. Detailed case studies or product walkthroughs are better in person.
11. Remember that the reviewer is wondering about you and what you can do, not just the products you worked on. You’re selling yourself, not them.
We look forward to continuing our partnership with GA to help mentor the next generation of UX!
Five speakers will drop some knowledge about design research at the new Spotify office Tues., Jan. 14 at "LeanUX Researchapaloozafest: An Epic Human-Centred Evening".
Catalyst's Director of Research & Insights, Deidre Kolarick, will give one of the five epic talks that evening -- she'll tackle the gnarly question, "Is bad research better than no research?"
If you want to know the answer, better sign up now. The cost to attend is $20. Bonus: "Fancy snacks" will be there for your consumption.
Run, run as fast as you can. We spent the afternoon making gingerbread men and women. (Well, we made their homes, but you get the idea.)
Armed with frosting, gummy penguins, and of course, gingerbread, we Catalytes got to work creating our ideal holiday treat.
With a room full of designers the creative energy was bound to get pretty intense. As the sugar high set in, the mood got downright silly. While some went the route of classic gingerbread homes, others felt the project called for different structures, including an anarchist church and a multilevel bar.
Whatever inspired everyone this afternoon we enjoyed the opportunity to indulge in this sugar-filled tradition.
A few weeks ago, my friend Tak made sheep-shaped waffles for a group of friends.
Tak designed and built a custom waffle iron as part of an ongoing project, “Sheep-shaped Cuisine.” The project draws from his experience as a product designer.
He went through a process of sketching, sculpting and prototyping before arriving on his final design. The waffle iron is a functional piece of art, complete with his own logo engraved on the outside.
The waffles were delicious, fun and beautiful.
Check out some photos of Tak's design process on his website.
