In the domain of usability, much attention is given to user satisfaction, intuitive design, ease of use and so on. This certainly has its merits and results in easier to use user interfaces, more satisfied users and in the end more sales revenues. A problem with this approach, though, is that it is biased towards novices and against experts. Simply put, the jobs done by specialists (often after years and years of training) are neither simple, easy nor intuitive. The tools they use are highly specialised, and only useable by specialists.
If the system as a whole (user + tools, in environment) should have high quality output, usability criteria should be focused on expert behaviour. The standard values of ease of use, subjective satisfaction and intuitiveness are all less important in this setting. A steep learning curve is not a problem, as long as the investment pays off in the end. In this respect it should be noted that learning processes are often not linear. In many domains early success is followed by a plateau phase or even a temporary decline in performance. Good design should take this into account. It is possible that a product that is moderately useful for beginners and unworkable for intermediate users has the best results in the expert group. Would that be a good product? I would think so.
However, designing for non-experts is easier in some respects. Product designers or usability experts can easily relate to novice users, but cannot easily become experts in the product-specific domain. Their own expectations influence the whole design and testing process. Getting real users for testing is more difficult as well, since experts are few and expensive.
No Comments