Learning from Product Design

I have always been a fan of product design. While I have spent a lot of my professional career in design - graphic design, user experience design, televsion design - I have never worked in traditonal product design. I admire Ideo and have had a chance to work with them via my client Snap-on. I used to follow frog design back in the day. Now I am becoming a fan of Adaptive Path.

Subject to Change is the "Adaptive Path" book written by Peter Merholz, Brandon Schauer, David Verba and Todd Wilkens. They cover a lot of their experiences and methods for product and service design. It's a good read. Part of the time I felt they were corroborating what I already believed. Part of the time they demonstrate a clear POV on develop products and services for clients that is insightful and fresh.

Social Media Engagement is like "Product" Design

One reason I focus on product design (I put "product" in quotes because it is the trade term but as you will see in my post, it is a misleading term) is that the discipline shares some best practices with what I do now with social media programs. There are three things in Subject to Change that stand out and are worth mentioning.

Empathy

The Adaptive Path guys (APgs) spend a lot of time talking about best ways - some new, some old - for understanding people. They stress the importance of empathy and they introduce research methods that can lead to spreading empathy for people (who use services and products) throughout the organization. One way they define empathy is "an understanding of a person or group's subjective experience by sharing that experience vicariously." While I know that the APgs are trying to be very professional - and I agree with them - I cannot help but want to shout - "It's not enough for companies to practice empathy; they should love their customers and want to know them personally." Anyhow, that's just the social media nut job in me. But the world would have a lot better products and services if companies made empathy a priority.

Behaviors, Motivations and Meanings

I am a  champion of usable design. Sounds terrible when I think about it. "Usable design" sounds like such a low bar. When I use it, I mean focusing on being of-use and offering a streamlined user experience. It implies focusing on tasks - what does the user want to accomplish. Just the term "user" says it all. APgs champion a new way which is not so new. It stresses understanding behaviors, motivations and meanings beyond simple tasks. They talk about people, not users. Their field research methods support this.  While APgs are suggesting this is an evolution for interactive and product designers, this is one area where I think the best brand marketers have a leg up. Our agency and many of our clients have long had ethnogarphers and held a deep value behind understanding behaviors. We long to understand the emotional drivers of our fellows by knowing what they do and where they find meaning.

Stop Designing "Products"

There is a huge interest amongst marketers to think about traditional products like services. In APgs case, they use examples like the iPod/ITunes service and the early Kodak film system (camera + development services). Any company ought to be looking at how to expand their view of their product to a potential service. That will be more difficult for simple consumer packaged goods (i.e. toilet paper). But with digital marketing and social media many, if not any, brands can think about being "of-service" in their marketing of their products. Listen to what your customers are saying and observe what they are doing. Find some way that you can enhance their lives that stems from the barnd. If you make Tupperware, help potluck supper enthusiasts. If you make computers for students offer people a companion program from Stephen Covey. If you offer a weight loss product, build your customers a way to track and reward their progress.And build a community of customers who add value to the overall customer experience. Spend more energy on that than on old-school advertising.   In short - design services not products; and market products likee services.

You should pick up Subject to Change. And you could do worse than to start thinking like a "product" designer.

Comments

[AmyT of www.diabetesmine.com]

Hi John,

Right on! Did you hear about the 2nd Annual DiabetesMine Design Challenge? Inspired in large part by Adaptive Path's work on the Charmr product last year...

See the press release at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/5/prweb939044.htm

This is a competition designed to foster innovation in diabetes design and encourage creative new tools that will improve life with diabetes.

The package of prizes offered to help further the winners' creative efforts includes $3,200 in cash, a two-hour workshop by IDEO design consultants specializing in health and wellness to help refine the winning concepts, and free access to the next "innovation incubator" Health 2.0 Conference in San Francisco in October for one adult winner.

See the official rules, etc., here:
http://www.diabetesmine.com/2008/04/the-2nd-annual.html

Only a few more days before we close for entries!

[Kevin Dugan]

John - interesting points above and on target with some brand design folks I heard speak earlier this week.

While Adaptive Path is calling this adding services to their products, Jump Associates refers to this as Open Empathy.

http://www.dmi.org/dmi/html/conference/branddesign08/sp_patnaik.htm