The sociologist’s questions always remain essentially the same: “What are people doing with each other here?” “What are their relationships to each other?” “How are these relationships organized in institutions?” “What are the collective ideas that move men and institutions?”

– Peter L. Berger，《Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective》

The opportunity assessment should just discuss the problem to be solved, not the particular solution you may have in mind.

All too often what happens is that a product manager combines the problem to be solved with the solution and, when they run into difficulties with the particular solution they are pursuing, they abandon the opportunity. It’s a classic example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

– Marty Cagan，《Inspired: How To Create Products Customers Love》

Einstein says, 『We cannot solve a problem at the same level of consciousness that created the problem.』

======================================

At the heart of the apparent problem is a dilemma. Problems can be solved, while dilemmas can only be resolved through a shift in perception.

======================================

Transformation is nothing more than a shift in perception. A shift in perception does not necessarily mean a happy ending. Freedom from the bondage of an idea does not necessarily mean that the boy gets the girl. Sometimes we only see the light as darkness descends.

– Alan Watt ，《The 90-Day Novel: Unlock the story within》

It doesn’t help that we live in a left-brain society. We have been trained to second-guess ourselves, to be more interested in the result than the process. We are not encouraged to be curious, so it’s difficult to really get quiet and inquire.

– Alan Watt ，《The 90-Day Novel: Unlock the story within》

雖然作者是在講「寫小說」這件事，但這段文字卻讓我不禁聯想到使用者研究。

The biggest downside to field studies is the cost to the organization. Scheduling the visits, taking team members out of the office for several days, and finishing the analysis can have a huge impact on a project’s resources.

The most successful organizations look beyond the current project, realizing that the value from the information learned will feed into future projects for years to come. Using this perspective, they amortize the costs across many development projects and it becomes an extremely cost effective method for gathering critical information. (這段其實和之前Norman爺的那句『Then when a project starts, hey guess what, the research has already been done.』有異曲同工之妙)

When we look at teams that are struggling to produce quality designs, almost always it is the result of spending time guessing and estimating user needs instead of working with actual data. Field studies can eliminate ‘opinion wars’ by replacing the strongly-held hunches of the team members with real information that describes what is happening. This is probably the biggest benefit that teams see.

– Jared Spool，《Field Studies: The Best Tool to Discover User Needs》

事物要不是從無發展出來，就是走向無。當傍晚降臨郊野，旅人尋覓擋風遮雨的掩蔽處。他發現到處都長滿高聳的燈芯草，於是割下一捆捆的草，將它們豎立在原野上，並將頂部綁緊豎好，就這樣，一座草屋出現了。第二天早上，在繼續接下來的行程之前，他鬆開燈芯草束，一瞬間草屋又瓦解消失，回歸成為廣大草原上的草堆之一。表面上原野恢復原樣，但遮蔽處的短暫蹤跡仍然保留。燈芯草上總會有輕微扭曲或彎折過的痕跡，而在草屋夜宿的記憶也會留存在旅人 – 還有正在閱讀這篇文章的讀者 – 的腦海中。wabi-sabi最純粹、最理想的表現形式，就正是關於這些褪淡的痕跡、薄弱的證據，遊走在無的邊界上。

– Leonard Koren，《Wabi-Sabi：給設計者、生活家的日式美學基礎》

在《Wabi-Sabi：給設計者、生活家的日式美學基礎》這本很快就能讀完一遍，但是不知道到底讀懂多少的小書當中，這是我最喜歡的一段文字。

中文翻譯版下載則是這邊。

第一次看到這本小書，是在網路上搜尋usability相關資料，逛到了Userfocus的網站時碰巧看到的。當時下載的是英文版的pdf。

後來參加insight舉辦的UX夏日聚活動，當娟姐講到她們做的平版電腦介面測試時，發現測試照片裡出現了一本叫做「一則關於用戶導向設計師的寓言故事」的電子書。回來之後搜尋了一下，在這邊找到了中文翻譯版。

其實這本小書裡頭的資訊量不高，如果你對UCD已經有些概念，大概不會覺得學到很多新東西。不過它仍是本有意思的小書，而且透過小故事來呈現內容，多少也為讀者留下一些自己發展與詮釋的空間，如果有空的話，倒也不妨花點時間讀讀。

為什麼？因為這些研究是平常就應該持續進行的，要做產品或服務的開發時，手邊應該已經有不少可用的現成研究資料才對。

Norman爺有一篇文章《Act First, Do the Research Later》，提到了五個他認為不見得要把design research當成產品/服務開發專案起手式的理由。而上面我所提到的，正是其中的一個(The researchers should always be studying the domain)。

Norman爺提到的五個理由包含了：

1. Case studies of products done without design research.

2. Experienced designers have a lot of pre-existing knowledge.

3. The researchers should always be studying the domain.

4. Too much research can inhibit creativity.

5. When the product is launched and the team assembled, it is already too late.

附帶一提，Norman爺的文章千萬不能只看標題就當結論，最好花點時間看內文。因為他經常會下很聳動的標題，但文章裡才會把標題要成立的各種但書或前提寫出來。

以下摘錄部分我閱讀時畫線的內容：

I find that in my design consulting, I will sometimes skip the research phase. Act first, then analyze and think about it afterwards. I can get away with this because I did the necessary research over the preceding years: I have a lot of pre-existing knowledge.

======================================

All fields have their bodies of pre-existing knowledge, thereby allowing skilled practitioners to act without apparent research or planning. That is, others have done the thinking for us: we can simply act, replying upon the existing wisdom to guide us.

======================================

I argued that we should not even bother to try to start with research. Instead, design researchers should always be studying the relevant issues. After all, the design researchers in a company know what kinds of products the company is interested in. Then when a project starts, hey guess what, the research has already been done.

======================================

I learned that reading and becoming expert at the existing research literature created a delicate tradeoff.

…(中略)…

Read too much of the existing literature about what previous researchers have thought and done and you will follow in their footsteps. This means that you will also encounter the same dead ends.

…(中略)…

But, and this is a most important 『but』: whenever I do this myself (which is frequent), and whenever I urge my students to do this, I then require extensive literature review after their work has gotten underway. This is to avoid what has already been done

======================================

But one important reason for design research is to influence and shape these decisions, to suggest new approaches and to ensure that real needs of the intended audience are met. The place for design research is at the executive table where the decisions are being made.

======================================

Skipping the research phase is only appropriate when, as I have said, the people doing this already have considerable experience with the situation. They already have considerable pre-existing knowledge. You could say that they have already done the research.

======================================

Yes, I believe that research is important, but it does not have to be done at the start of a design project. It can be done far ahead of time, or even just afterwards. Good designers should always be engaged in observation, in mentally reviewing and creating artifacts, in sketching, writing, planning and thinking.

…(中略)…

Act first, research later? Well, not quite. Always be researching. Always be acting.

– Donald A. Norman，《Act First, Do the Research Later》

We believe in going undercover.

We believe in introducing UX from the ground up.

We believe change comes through small victories.

We believe in delivery, not deliverables.

We believe good design today is better than great design next year.

We believe in working with people, not against them.

We believe in action, not words.

– Cennydd Bowles, James Box，《Undercover User Experience Design》

臥底宣言全文請見該書官網上的 The undercover manifesto。

The distinction between front- and backstage components of a service implies a neat separation, but this is misleading.

…(中略)…

Everything has a front and back, so each of the backstage components has its own front and back.

…(中略)…

Services are recursive. They are somewhat like matryoshka dolls of figure 6.1, the Russian nested dolls: when you open one up, it holds another very similar doll inside, and if you open that one up, there is yet another doll. The design of modern systems and services must cope with this recursiveness, with the fact that what is to be designed depends on the point of view. Do you take the point of view of the customer, the clerk, the backroom assistant, or the central administration? Answer: you must consider them all.

…(中略)…

The design problem here is immense: how can all the participants involved, both customers and employees, receive the information they need so that they can understand the operations?

…(中略)…

It is essential that services be designed with both the staff and customers in mind.

– Donald A. Norman，《Living with Complexity》

Although the design of products has received considerable attention, the study of service design is still in its infancy. As a result, less is known about the design of services than products. Moreover, product design is sexy: it is easy to hold design contests where companies submit fancy photographs of their products and then harried jurors spend a few days trying to select the prize winners.

…(中略)…

Services don’t have the glamour of products. In many cases, there is nothing to see.

– Donald A. Norman，《Living with Complexity》

Placing a character in a context and communicating not just the events, but also using the imagery of the sensory experience is what differentiates a story from other techniques for modeling interaction, like flow charts and use cases.

– Whitney Quesenbery & Kevin Brooks，《Storytelling for User Experience》

導演會自問這樣的問題：「怎樣做才能保證讓觀眾知道那個現場是『車庫』？也許來畫個『車庫』的標誌？」之後我就會同藝術部門的工作人員討論如何做「標誌」。結果兩部電影下來，我做了一大堆「招牌」。然而，沒有人會注意電影裡的招牌，真的，沒人會看。這些「招牌」等於是導演不打自招，承認自己拙劣的設計。

…(中略)…

還有一項便利但毫無用處的東西是事後插補對白，它的原意是為了傳達拍戲時沒加上的訊息。例如，替背對觀眾的演員補配台詞。這就像在說：「嘿！看一下。我們現在要下樓梯了，現在又要到地下室去了。」一樣，無效，對吧？因為觀眾所關切的是這場戲會發生什麼事？主角想要什麼？更準確地說，是這個鏡頭的重點是什麼？

…(中略)…

電影是什麼？電影就是設計(design)。電影的完成是靠導演對電影題材本質的了解而做的設計。

– David Mamet，《導演功課》

李歐納認為，「觀察」這個小動作，有五個要注意的大方向，包括：「使用產品的時機」，什麼樣的狀況下，會使用特定的產品呢？「人與使用環境的互動」，是廚房、客廳或辦公場所；「使用者自行改裝與客製化產品」，其實往往隱含著產品所需要的功能與未來創新的方向；看見「看不見的功能」與「潛在的需求」，則是設計觀察的重要方法，消費者無法描述的需求，其實可以由行為觀察到。

– 吳翰中、吳琍璇，《美學CEO》

「機會只保留給那些做好準備的人」。觀察技術、同理心原則，以及努力超越個體，這些主題和變異都可以視為設計思考家尋找洞見的準備方法：從看似平凡和異乎尋常的現象中尋找，從日常生活的儀式和打破例行公事的意外插曲中尋找，從一般常人和極端份子中尋找。目前，我們還無法將洞見編碼、量化或甚至做出定義，一點辦法都沒有，這讓尋找洞見變成設計過程中最困難，但也最刺激的一部份。沒有任何演算法則可以告訴我們，洞見會從哪裡冒出來，又會在何時猛敲我們一下。

– Tim Brown，《設計思考改造世界》

雖然雜貨店老闆、辦公人員和小學生不是在案子結束時會開支票給我們的人，但他們確是我們的終極客戶。唯一能了解他們的方法，就是去他們居住、工作和玩耍的地方找他們。…(中略)…我們看他們做（和不做）什麼，聽他們說（和不說）什麼。這可是一項需要練習的工作。

– Tim Brown，《設計思考改造世界》

付錢的人是大爺，但通常不會是最後真正的使用者。

一是發想空間，要從所有可能的地方收集洞見；二是構思空間，在這裡將洞見轉化成構想；三是執行空間，將最好的構想發展成明確、完整的行動規劃。

…(中略)…

是「彼此重疊的空間」而不是環環相扣的連續階段。洞見很少會準時出現，

…(中略)…

這些階段各不相同，對團隊士氣而言尤其重要的是，要認清各個階段的感覺不同，需要的策略自然也不同。

…(中略)…

甚至還發明了「專案心情圖表」，十分準確地預測出專案團隊在不同的階段會有什麼感受：

當剛組成的團隊帶著冒險精神實地觀察收集資訊時，整個團隊都洋溢著樂觀主義的氣息。接下來就是整理數據、找出模式的階段與過程，可能會讓人感到沮喪洩氣，因為所有重要的決定似乎都像是建立在最不真實的直覺之上。

…(中略)…

有經驗的設計思考家知道什麼是他該期待的，什麼又是偶爾的情緒低潮毀滅不了的。設計思考很少是從一個顛峰優雅地跳到另一個顛峰；它會考驗我們的情緒敏感度…(中略)…但它也會用耀眼的成果回報我們的堅持不懈。

– Tim Brown，《設計思考改造世界》

突然想到之前曾經被問到，當田野都跑完，做整體分析找研究發現是怎麼一回事。我的答案是：像便秘一樣。你會花上一段時間努力把東西擠出來，而且通常不會在第一次就擠乾淨，總是會覺得還有些東西沒有出來。

是的，Tim Brown說的沒錯，洞見很少會準時出現。而Richard Hoggart說的也沒錯，我們得學會在充滿不確定性的狀況下，仍保有某種程度的方向感並持續前進。

簡報(覺得這個翻譯怪怪的，但是手邊沒有英文版，不知道原本是用哪個字，會是brief嗎？)是所有專案工作的起點。簡報幾乎就像是科學假設，是一套腦力限制條件，提供專案團隊一個著手進行的架構，一套衡量進度的標準，以及一組有待實現的目標：價格點、可以使用的技術、市場區隔等等。

…(中略)…

設計思考需要雙方共同實踐：其中一方當然是設計團隊，但客戶同樣也很重要。我算不清有多少客戶才剛踏進門就嚷著「給我下一個iPod」，不過，私下竊竊回說「給我下一個賈伯斯」的設計師，數量也不少。

– Tim Brown，《設計思考改造世界》

這種交互影響、非直線的走法(指在inspiration、ideation、implementation之間來來回回的過程)，並不是因為設計思考家沒有組織、缺乏紀律，而是因為設計思考基本上就是一種探索的過程；只要做對了，必然會在路途中找到預料之外的發現。

– Tim Brown，《設計思考改造世界》

重構(reframe)不只是有一番見地或對資料的有趣看法，而是從根本上改變你對這個世界如何運作的觀念。

…(中略)…

公司若能正確重構，幾乎能在所有的市場發現新價值。一旦學會用新的眼光看世界，就沒有一樣東西看起來跟先前的一樣。

…(中略)…

最大的機會來自於重構之後，能看出別人對自己的生活看不見的部分。要做到這點，還是要請你花很多時間穿上顧客的鞋走路，傾聽他們的故事；更重要的是，這種重構需要體會他人日常生活的表象下，所隱藏的意涵。

…(中略)…

訪談的對象絕對不會提到這個觀點，事實上也沒人說得出來，但是這種訊息就隱藏在他們的談話裡。

…(中略)…

成功的重構代表一家公司察覺對手所不知道的世界，雖然這不是在市場上成功的必然因素，卻比別種差異化策略更易守難攻。

– Dev Patnaik、Peter Mortensen，《誰說商業直覺是天生的》

我們不問一堆特定的問題，只是試著讓這些人告訴我們他們的工作狀況，然後觀察整個過程，試著找出模式。在聽了許多設備經理與業務員的故事之後，一個有趣的畫面浮現出來了。

– Dev Patnaik、Peter Mortensen，《誰說商業直覺是天生的》

想要超越抽象資訊的決策者都學會花時間與客戶相處，他們到顧客光顧的店買東西、拜訪顧客的家，跳脫自我去體驗顧客的生活。這一切都是為了收集決策時所需的背景資訊。

…(中略)…

同理心可以提供決策者數據背後的脈絡，一種對他們所見所聞背後有何涵意的清楚感覺。

– Dev Patnaik、Peter Mortensen，《誰說商業直覺是天生的》

對顧客的同理心可以讓抽象變得具體、直接，讓這些資訊能夠對應到你認識的、活生生的人們。同理心可以提供數據資料背後的脈絡，補足地圖遺漏的部分。跟他人建立同理心的關係，對「地區」有更深入的體驗，能讓組織內的人員從中發掘新機會。

– Dev Patnaik、Peter Mortensen，《誰說商業直覺是天生的》

我想我有些了解深澤先生所思考的方法論了。第一個方法是在周遭環境中尋找、發現行為利用過之物。剛才有張照片是在摩托車後座載了一個超市的提籃，騎車的人腳剛好踩在人行道的邊上。仔細看看我們的身邊，就會發現有許多像這樣超乎想像的組合。

…(中略)…

還有另一張，在公車站牌旁邊的人行道護欄，因為被用來當作椅子而變得彎曲的照片。…(中略)…像這樣只看見結果，卻看不到進行行為的人，這就是痕跡。…(中略)…第二個方法就是尋找這個「痕跡」。

…(中略)…

所謂的「留下痕跡」，代表的是「在那個場所進行相同行為」具有其他要因。如果剛好有紅綠燈、有白色的停止線，旁邊還有人行道，說不定每個騎摩托車的人都會把左腳放在上面。既使相同的東西也會像這樣有不同的情形。

– 後藤武、佐佐木正人、深澤直人，《不為設計而設計=最好的設計：生態學的設計論》