15.4.2024

We have a problem with User Centric Design

In the world of design, we often hear terms such as User Centric Design, Design Thinking, Co-design and Design Sprint used. These services are sold by many agencies and are the subject of hundreds of articles, books and guides by designers, marketing experts and startups. However, what we would like to focus on is the concept of User Centric Design (UCD), one of the most “mature” approaches in the design landscape that, precisely because of the maturity phase it is going through, we believe that it is necessary to review and question.

What is User Centric Design

The UCD is considered the key approach in the design of products, services and experiences: it puts the needs, desires and abilities of end users at the center of design decisions, with the aim of optimizing the user experience through the analysis and direct observation of the users themselves.

The story of User Centric Design began in the late '70s and continues in the '80s, when the first researchers in the field of computer science and human-machine interaction began to study and promote a user-oriented approach. In the 90s, it was the American psychologist and engineer Donald Norman who emphasized the importance of designing products based on the understanding of the cognitive abilities of users, making the practice mainstream.

In the following years, User Centric Design becomes a more structured discipline and various methodologies and frameworks emerge to integrate the needs of users into the design process. Today, it is in effect a widespread practice in various sectors, including product design, user interface, information architecture and service development, and is considered essential for the success of design projects.

The problems of User Centric Design

The nature and complexity of the products and services we are called to design is constantly expanding, so the design approach must evolve and expand its field of vision: the user can no longer be considered the sole and only focus of the design.

In particular, there are two critical points of User Centric Design:

1. Designing for the individual vs for the community

The UCD focuses on the user as a single individual, not considering the community, the collectivity, the relationships, the ecosystem and the environment.

2. Designing for the present vs for the future

The UCD considers the individual and his present needs, not taking into account his future needs, nor the impacts of the project in the medium and long term.

The Uber case and the unexpected (negative) consequences

Let's take a successful example like Uber. The company, founded in 2009, has managed to grow dramatically and to upset a traditional industry such as that of taxis, thanks to a user-focused approach. How? It has identified the challenges that every person must face to move from point A to point B in large cities (search, availability, booking, payment, trust, etc.) and has provided simple, quick and economic solutions.

However, with Uber - as with Lift, Bolt and all the other companies that share the same business model - we continue to move from point A to point B, in a combustion vehicle (at most hybrid), driven by a person. It's exactly like taking a taxi.

What was the impact of this' revolution 'on environmental and social sustainability? If the company's stated objective was to reduce traffic in large cities, the result was the exact opposite:

- More traffic and more pollution: fleets of cars clog up the points of greatest interest ready to respond to our reservations in less than two minutes.

- Less environmental sensitivity: the accessibility and ease of booking services such as Uber have made it more common to use private vehicles instead of more sustainable public transport, such as buses or subways.

- More competition and lower margins: the increase in competition has reduced the earnings of both individual drivers and taxi drivers, leading to an increasingly reduced economic margin for both professional categories.

Solution: broaden the perspective

Design choices that benefit an individual user could cause harm to other users, to those who provide the service, to the community for which it is provided or to the environment in which we live.

Don Norman has already addressed these issues in his book “Designing for a Better World”, in which the concept of User Centric Design has evolved towards an approach called Human-centered Design, which considers the impacts of our design decisions more broadly, paving the way for a more conscious and responsible design.

At the same time, several disciplines have emerged that seek to guide design in a more sustainable and responsible direction: such as System Mapping, an approach for mapping complex systems; Speculative Design, a framework for trying to describe and imagine the future; Foresight Design, a method for designing systems with long-term impacts.

Our point of view: looking outside, but also inside

There is another fundamental aspect to consider: as designers we have thoroughly studied User Centric Design, we know the benefits that this approach can bring, we are ambassadors of this methodology and we try to promote it every time we face a new project.

At the same time, we have often realized some limitations: when all the attention is focused on the end user, we risk forgetting that even the company we are working for is made up of people.

What are the needs of marketing managers, R&D departments or production? Who is involved in the entire distribution chain? What do those who sell the product expect? What are the needs of those who provide the service?

Adopting a design method without considering the background, knowledge and needs of the people who contribute to the project, means losing or neglecting something important.

As designers, we have the power to positively or negatively influence the design and production process. Active listening, empathy and collaboration must not be addressed only to “sacred” end users, but to all the professionals involved in the project.

For this reason, like Rawr, we involve the company team in all phases of the design process, through workshops, field observations of internal processes and dynamics, meetings and continuous alignments. Even a simple chat in front of the coffee machine offers us valuable information and contributes to a more inclusive and conscious design.

Knowing not only “for whom” but also “with whom” we are designing is at the heart of every design project. It is certainly the heart of Rawr's projects.

If you want to know more about the Uber case: Fast Company: Uber and Lyft are everything that's right and wrong with design today.

Continue reading our blogs