rowid,title,contents,year,author,author_slug,published,url,topic 203,Jobs-to-Be-Done in Your UX Toolbox,"Part 1: What is JTBD? The concept of a “job” in “Jobs-To-Be-Done” is neatly encapsulated by a oft-quoted line from Theodore Levitt: “People want a quarter-inch hole, not a quarter inch drill”. Even so, Don Norman pointed out that perhaps Levitt “stopped too soon” at what the real customer goal might be. In the “The Design of Everyday Things”, he wrote: “Levitt’s example of the drill implying that the goal is really a hole is only partially correct, however. When people go to a store to buy a drill, that is not their real goal. But why would anyone want a quarter-inch hole? Clearly that is an intermediate goal. Perhaps they wanted to hang shelves on the wall. Levitt stopped too soon. Once you realize that they don’t really want the drill, you realize that perhaps they don’t really want the hole, either: they want to install their bookshelves. Why not develop methods that don’t require holes? Or perhaps books that don’t require bookshelves.” In other words, a “job” in JTBD lingo is a way to express a user need or provide a customer-centric problem frame that’s independent of a solution. As Tony Ulwick says: “A job is stable, it doesn’t change over time.” An example of a job is “tiding you over from breakfast to lunch.” You could hire a donut, a flapjack or a banana for that mid-morning snack—whatever does the job. If you can arrive at a clearly identified primary job (and likely some secondary ones too), you can be more creative in how you come up with an effective solution while keeping the customer problem in focus. The team at Intercom wrote a book on their application of JTBD. In it, Des Traynor cleverly characterised how JTBD provides a different way to think about solutions that compete for the same job: “Economy travel and business travel are both capable candidates applying for [the job: Get me face-to-face with my colleague in San Francisco], though they’re looking for significantly different salaries. Video conferencing isn’t as capable, but is willing to work for a far smaller salary. I’ve a hiring choice to make.” So far so good: it’s relatively simple to understand what a job is, once you understand how it’s different from a “task”. Business consultant and Harvard professor Clay Christensen talks about the concept of “hiring” a product to do a “job”, and firing it when something better comes along. If you’re a company that focuses solutions on the customer job, you’re more likely to succeed. You’ll find these concepts often referred to as “Jobs-to-be-Done theory”. But the application of Jobs-to-Be-Done theory is a little more complicated; it comprises several related approaches. I particularly like Jim Kalbach’s description of how JTBD is a “lens through which to understand value creation”. But it is also more. In my view, it’s a family of frameworks and methods—and perhaps even a philosophy. Different facets in a family of frameworks JTBD has its roots in market research and business strategy, and so it comes to the research table from a slightly different place compared to traditional UX or design research—we have our roots in human-computer interaction and ergonomics. I’ve found it helpful to keep in mind is that the application of JTBD theory is an evolving beast, so it’s common to find contradictions across different resources. My own use of it has varied from project to project. In speaking to others who have adopted it in different measures, it seems that we have all applied it in somewhat multifarious ways. As we like to often say in interviews: there are no wrong answers. Outcome Driven Innovation Tony Ulwick’s version of the JTBD history began with Outcome Driven Innovation (ODI), and this approach is best outlined in his seminal article published in the Harvard Business Review in 2002. To understand his more current JTBD approach in his new book “Jobs to Be Done: Theory to Practice”, I actually found it beneficial to read his approach in the original 2002 article for a clearer reference point. In the earlier article, Ulwick presented a rigorous approach that combines interviews, surveys and an “opportunity” algorithm—a sequence of steps to determine the business opportunity. ODI centres around working with “desired outcome statements” that you unearth through interviews, followed by a means to quantify the gap between importance and satisfaction in a survey to different types of customers. Since 2008, Ulwick has written about using job maps to make sense of what the customer may be trying to achieve. In a recent article, he describes the aim of the activity is “to discover what the customer is trying to get done at different points in executing a job and what must happen at each juncture in order for the job to be carried out successfully.” A job map is not strictly a journey map, however tempting it is to see it that way. From a UX perspective, is one of many models we can use—and as our research team at Clearleft have found, how we use model can depend on the nature of the jobs we’ve uncovered in interviews and the characteristics of the problem we’re attempting to solve. Figure 1. Universal job map Ulwick’s current methodology is outlined in his new book, where he describes a complete end-to-end process: from customer and competitor research to framing market and product strategy. The Jobs-To-Be-Done Interview Back in 2013, I attended a workshop by Chris Spiek and Bob Moesta from the ReWired Group on JTBD at the behest of a then-MailChimp colleague, and I came away excited about their approach to product research. It felt different from anything I’d done before and for the first time in years, I felt that I was genuinely adding something new to my research toolbox. A key idea is that if you focus on the stories of those who switched to you, and those who switch away from you, you can uncover the core jobs through looking at these opposite ends of engagement. This framework centres around the JTBD interview method, which harnesses the power of a narrative framework to elicit the real reasons why someone “hired” something to do a job—be it something physical like a new coffee maker, or a digital service, such as a to-do list app. As you interview, you are trying to unearth the context around the key moments on the JTBD timeline (Figure 2). A common approach is to begin from the point the customer might have purchased something, back to the point where the thought of buying this thing first occurred to them. Figure 2. JTBD Timeline Figure 3. The Four Forces The Forces Diagram (Figure 3) is a post-interview analysis tool where you can map out what causes customers to switch to something new and what holds them back. The JTBD interview is effective at identifying core and secondary jobs, as well as some context around the user need. Because this method is designed to extract the story from the interviewee, it’s a powerful way to facilitate recall. Having done many such interviews, I’ve noticed one interesting side effect: participants often remember more details later on after the conversation has formally ended. It is worth scheduling a follow-up phone call or keep the channels open. Strengths aside, it’s good to keep in mind that the JTBD interview is still primarily an interview technique, so you are relying on the context from the interviewee’s self-reported perspective. For example, a stronger research methodology combines JTBD interviews with contextual research and quantitative methods. Job Stories Alan Klement is credited for coming up with the term “job story” to describe the framing of jobs for product design by the team at Intercom: “When … I want to … so I can ….” Figure 4. Anatomy of a Job Story Unlike a user story that traditionally frames a requirement around personas, job stories frame the user need based on the situation and context. Paul Adams, the VP of Product at Intercom, wrote: “We frame every design problem in a Job, focusing on the triggering event or situation, the motivation and goal, and the intended outcome. […] We can map this Job to the mission and prioritise it appropriately. It ensures that we are constantly thinking about all four layers of design. We can see what components in our system are part of this Job and the necessary relationships and interactions required to facilitate it. We can design from the top down, moving through outcome, system, interactions, before getting to visual design.” Systems of Progress Apart from advocating using job stories, Klement believes that a core tenet of applying JTBD revolves around our desire for “self-betterment”—and that focusing on everyone’s desire for self-betterment is core to a successful strategy. In his book, Klement takes JTBD further to being a tool for change through applying systems thinking. There, he introduces the systems of progress and how it can help focus product strategy approach to be more innovative. Coincidentally, I applied similar thinking on mapping systemic change when we were looking to improve users’ trust with a local government forum earlier this year. It’s not just about capturing and satisfying the immediate job-to-be-done, it’s about framing the job so that you can a clear vision forward on how you can help your users improve their lives in the ways they want to. This is really the point where JTBD becomes a philosophy of practice. Part 2: Mixing It Up There has been some misunderstanding about how adopting JTBD means ditching personas or some of our existing design tools or research techniques. This couldn’t have been more wrong. Figure 5: Jim Kalbach’s JTBD model Jim Kalbach has used Outcome-Driven Innovation for around 10 years. In a 2016 article, he presents a synthesised model of how to think about that has key elements from ODI, Christensen’s theories and the structure of the job story. More interestingly, Kalbach has also combined the use of mental models with JTBD. Claire Menke of UDemy has written a comprehensive article about using personas, JTBD and customer journey maps together in order to communicate more complete story from the users’ perspective. Claire highlights an especially interesting point in her article as she described her challenges: “After much trial and error, I arrived at a foundational research framework to suit every team’s needs — allowing everyone to share the same holistic understanding, but extract the type of information most applicable to their work.” In other words, the organisational context you are in likely can dictate what works best—after all the goal is to arrive at the best user experience for your audiences. Intercom can afford to go full-on on applying JTBD theory as a dominant approach because they are a start-up, but a large company or organisation with multiple business units may require a mix of tools, outputs and outcomes. JTBD is an immensely powerful approach on many fronts—you’ll find many different references that lists the ways you can apply JTBD. However, in the context of this discussion, it might also be useful to we examine where it lies in our models of how we think about our UX and product processes. JTBD in the UX ecosystem Figure 6. The Elements of User Experience (source) There are many ways we have tried to explain the UX discipline but I think Jesse James Garrett’s Elements of User Experience is a good place to begin. I sometimes also use little diagram to help me describe the different levels you might work at when you work through the complexity of designing and developing a product. A holistic UX strategy needs to address all the different levels for a comprehensive experience: your individual product UI, product features, product propositions and brand need to have a cohesive definition. Figure 7. Which level of product focus? We could, of course, also think about where it fits best within the double diamond. Again, bearing in mind that JTBD has its roots in business strategy and market research, it is excellent at clarifying user needs, defining high-level specifications and content requirements. It is excellent for validating brand perception and value proposition —all the way down to your feature set. In other words, it can be extremely powerful all the way through to halfway of the second diamond. You could quite readily combine the different JTBD approaches because they have differences as much as overlaps. However, JTBD generally starts getting a little difficult to apply once we get to the details of UI design. The clue lies in JTBD’s raison d’être: a job statement is solution independent. Hence, once we get to designing solutions, we potentially fall into a existential black hole. That said, Jim Kalbach has a quick case study on applying JTBD to content design tucked inside the main article on a synthesised JTBD model. Alan Klement has a great example of how you could use UI to resolve job stories. You’ll notice that the available language of “jobs” drops off at around that point. Job statements and outcome statements provide excellent “mini north-stars” as customer-oriented focal points, but purely satisfying these statements would not necessarily guarantee that you have created a seamless and painless user experience. Playing well with others You will find that JTBD plays well with Lean, and other strategy tools like the Value Proposition Canvas. With every new project, there is potential to harness the power of JTBD alongside our established toolbox. When we need to understand complex contexts where cultural or socioeconomic considerations have to be taken into account, we are better placed with combining JTBD with more anthropological approaches. And while we might be able to evaluate if our product, website or app satisfies the customer jobs through interviews or surveys, without good old-fashioned usability testing we are unlikely to be able to truly validate why the job isn’t being represented as it should. In this case, individual jobs solved on the UI can be set up as hypotheses to be proven right or wrong. The application of Jobs-to-be-Done is still evolving. I’ve found it to be very powerful and I struggle to remember what my UX professional life was like before I encountered it—it has completely changed my approach to research and design. The fact JTBD is still evolving as a practice means we need to be watchful of dogma—there’s no right way to get a UX job done after all, it nearly always depends. At the end of the day, isn’t it about having the right tool for the right job?",2017,Steph Troeth,stephtroeth,2017-12-04T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2017/jobs-to-be-done-in-your-ux-toolbox/,ux 219,Speed Up Your Site with Delayed Content,"Speed remains one of the most important factors influencing the success of any website, and the first rule of performance (according to Yahoo!) is reducing the number of HTTP requests. Over the last few years we’ve seen techniques like sprites and combo CSS/JavaScript files used to reduce the number of HTTP requests. But there’s one area where large numbers of HTTP requests are still a fact of life: the small avatars attached to the comments on articles like this one. Avatars Many sites like 24 ways use a fantastic service called Gravatar to provide user images. As a user, you can sign up to Gravatar, give them your e-mail address, and upload an image to represent you. Sites can then include your image by generating a one way hash of your e-mail address and using that to build an image URL. For example, the markup for the comments on this page looks something like this:

Drew McLellan

This is a great article!

The Gravatar URL contains two parts. 100 is the size in pixels of the image we want. 13734b0cb20708f79e730809c29c3c48 is an MD5 digest of Drew’s e-mail address. Using MD5 means we can request an image for a user without sharing their e-mail address with anyone who views the source of the page. So what’s wrong with avatars? The problem is that a popular article can easily get hundreds of comments, and every one of them means another image has to be individually requested from Gravatar’s servers. Each request is small and the Gravatar servers are fast but, when you add them up, it can easily add seconds to the rendering time of a page. Worse, they can delay the loading of more important assets like the CSS required to render the main content of the page. These images aren’t critical to the page, and don’t need to be loaded up front. Let’s see if we can delay loading them until everything else is done. That way we can give the impression that our site has loaded quickly even if some requests are still happening in the background. Delaying image loading The first problem we find is that there’s no way to prevent Internet Explorer, Chrome or Safari from loading an image without removing it from the HTML itself. Tricks like removing the images on the fly with JavaScript don’t work, as the browser has usually started requesting the images before we get a chance to stop it. Removing the images from the HTML means that people without JavaScript enabled in their browser won’t see avatars. As Drew mentioned at the start of the month, this can affect a large number of people, and we can’t completely ignore them. But most sites already have a textual name attached to each comment and the avatars are just a visual enhancement. In most cases it’s OK if some of our users don’t see them, especially if it speeds up the experience for the other 98%. Removing the images from the source of our page also means we’ll need to put them back at some point, so we need to keep a record of which images need to be requested. All Gravatar images have the same URL format; the only thing that changes is the e-mail hash. Storing this is a great use of HTML5 data attributes. HTML5 data what? Data attributes are a new feature in HTML5. The latest version of the spec says: A custom data attribute is an attribute in no namespace whose name starts with the string “data-”, has at least one character after the hyphen, is XML-compatible, and contains no characters in the range U+0041 to U+005A (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A to LATIN CAPITAL LETTER Z). […] Custom data attributes are intended to store custom data private to the page or application, for which there are no more appropriate attributes or elements. These attributes are not intended for use by software that is independent of the site that uses the attributes. In other words, they’re attributes of an HTML element that start with “data-” which you can use to share data with scripts running on your site. They’re great for adding small bits of metadata that don’t fit into an existing markup pattern the way microformats do. Let’s see this in action Take a look at the markup for comments again:

Drew McLellan

This is a great article!

Let’s replace the element with a data-gravatar-hash attribute on the element:

Drew McLellan

This is a great article!

Once we’ve done this, we’ll need a small bit of JavaScript to find all these attributes, and replace them with images after the page has loaded. Here’s an example using jQuery: $(window).load(function() { $('a[data-gravatar-hash]').prepend(function(index){ var hash = $(this).attr('data-gravatar-hash') return '' }) }) This code waits until everything on the page is loaded, then uses jQuery.prepend to insert an image into every link containing a data-gravatar-hash attribute. It’s short and relatively simple, but in tests it reduced the rendering time of a sample page from over three seconds to well under one. Finishing touches We still need to consider the appearance of the page before the avatars have loaded. When our script adds extra content to the page it will cause a browser reflow, which is visually annoying. We can avoid this by using CSS to reserve some space for each image before it’s inserted into the HTML: #comments div { padding-left: 110px; min-height: 100px; position: relative; } #comments div h4 img { display: block; position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; } In a real world example, we’ll also find that the HTML for a comment is more varied as many users don’t provide a web page link. We can make small changes to our JavaScript and CSS to handle this case. Put this all together and you get this example. Taking this idea further There’s no reason to limit this technique to sites using Gravatar; we can use similar code to delay loading any images that don’t need to be present immediately. For example, this year’s redesigned Flickr photo page uses a “data-defer-src” attribute to describe any image that doesn’t need to be loaded straight away, including avatars and map tiles. You also don’t have to limit yourself to loading the extra resources once the page loads. You can get further bandwidth savings by waiting until the user takes an action before downloading extra assets. Amazon has taken this tactic to the extreme on its product pages – extra content is loaded as you scroll down the page. So next time you’re building a page, take a few minutes to think about which elements are peripheral and could be delayed to allow more important content to appear as quickly as possible.",2010,Paul Hammond,paulhammond,2010-12-18T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2010/speed-up-your-site-with-delayed-content/,ux 245,Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1—for People Who Haven’t Read the Update,"Happy United Nations International Day of Persons with Disabilities 2018! The United Nations chose “Empowering persons with disabilities and ensuring inclusiveness and equality” as this year’s theme. We’ve seen great examples of that in 2018; for example, Paul Robert Lloyd has detailed how he improved the accessibility of this very website. On social media, US Congressmember-Elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez started using the Clipomatic app to add live captions to her Instagram live stories, conforming to success criterion 1.2.4, “Captions (Live)” of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (figure 1) …and British Vogue Contributing Editor Sinéad Burke has used the split-screen feature of Instagram live stories to invite an interpreter to provide live Sign Language interpretation, going above and beyond success criterion 1.2.6, “Sign Language (Prerecorded)” of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (figure 2). Figure 1: Screenshot of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Instagram story with live captionsFigure 2: Screenshot of Sinéad Burke’s Instagram story with Sign Language Interpretation That theme chimes with this year’s publication of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. In last year’s “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines—for People Who Haven’t Read Them”, I mentioned the scale of the project to produce this update during 2018: “the editors have to update the guidelines to cover all the new ways that people interact with new technologies, while keeping the guidelines backwards-compatible”. The WCAG working group have added 17 success criteria to the 61 that they released way back in 2008—for context, that was 1½ years before Apple released their first iPad! These new criteria make it easier than ever for us web geeks to produce work that is more accessible to people using mobile devices and touchscreens, people with low vision, and people with cognitive and learning disabilities. Once again, let’s rip off all the legalese and ambiguous terminology like wrapping paper, and get up to date. Can your users perceive the information on your website? The first guideline has criteria that help you prevent your users from asking, “What the **** is this thing here supposed to be?” We’ve seven new criteria for this guideline. 1.3.4 Some people can’t easily change the orientation of the device that they use to browse the web, and so you should make sure that your users can use your website in portrait orientation and in landscape orientation. Consider how people slowly twirl presents that they have plucked from under the Christmas tree, to find the appropriate orientation—and expect your users to do likewise with your websites and apps. We’ve had 18½ years since John Allsopp’s revelatory Dao of Web Design enlightened us to “embrace the fact that the web doesn’t have the same constraints” as printed pages, and to “design for this flexibility”. So, even though this guideline doesn’t apply to websites where “a specific display orientation is essential,” such as a piano tutorial, always ask yourself, “What would John Allsopp do?” 1.3.5 You should help the user’s browser to automatically complete–or not complete–form fields, to save the user some time and effort. The surprisingly powerful and flexible autocomplete attribute for input elements should prove most useful here. If you’ve used microformats or microdata to mark up information about a person, the autocomplete attribute’s range of values should seem familiar. I like how the W3’s “Using HTML 5.2 autocomplete attributes” says that autocompleted values in forms help “those with dexterity disabilities who have trouble typing, those who may need more time, and anyone who wishes to reduce effort to fill out a form” (emphasis mine). Um…🙋‍♂️ 1.3.6 I like this one a lot, because it can help a huge audience to overcome difficulties that might prevent them from ever using the web. Some people have cognitive difficulties that affect their memory, focus, attention, language processing, and/or decision-making. Those users often rely on assistive technologies that present information through proprietary symbols, summaries of content, and keyboard shortcuts. You could use ARIA landmarks to identify the regions of each webpage. You could also keep an eye on the W3C’s ongoing work on Personalisation Semantics. 1.4.10 If you were to find a Nintendo Switch and “Super Mario Odyssey” under your Christmas tree, you would have many hours of enjoyably scrolling horizontally and vertically to play the game. On the other hand, if you had to zoom a webpage to 400% so that you could read the content, you might have many hours of frustratedly scrolling horizontally and vertically to read the content. Learned reader, I assume you understand the purpose and the core techniques of Responsive Web Design. I also assume you’re getting up to speed with the new Grid, Flexbox, and Box Alignment techniques for layout, and overflow-wrap. Using those skills, you should make sure that all content and functionality remain available when the browser is 320px wide, without your user needing to scroll horizontally. (For vertical text, you should make sure that all content and functionality remain available when the browser is 256px high, without your user needing to scroll vertically.) You don’t have to do this for anything that would lose meaning if you restructured it into one narrow column. That includes some images, maps, diagrams, video, games, presentations, and data tables. Remember to check how your media queries affect font size: your user might find that text becomes smaller as they zoom into the webpage. So, test this one on real devices, or—better yet—test it with real users. 1.4.11 In “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines—for People Who Haven’t Read Them”, I recommended bookmarking Lea Verou’s Contrast Ratio calculator for checking that text contrasts enough with its background (for success criteria 1.4.3 and 1.4.6), so that more people can read it more easily. For this update, you should make sure that form elements and their focus states have a 3:1 contrast ratio with the colour around them. This doesn’t apply to controls that use the browser’s default styling. Also, you should make sure that graphics that convey information have a 3:1 contrast ratio with the colour around them. 1.4.12 Some people, due to low vision or dyslexia, might need to modify the typography that you agonised over. Research indicates that you should make sure that all content and functionality would remain available if a user were to set: line height to at least 1½ × the font size; space below paragraphs to at least 2 × the font size; letter spacing to at least 0.12 × the font size; word spacing to at least 0.16 × the font size. To test this, check for text overlapping, text hiding behind other elements, or text disappearing. 1.4.13 Sometimes when visiting a website, you hover over—or tab on to—something that unleashes a newsletter subscription pop-up, some suggested “related content”, and/or a GDPR-related pop-up. On a well-designed website, you can press the Esc key on your keyboard or click a prominent “Close” button or “X” button to vanquish such intrusions. If the Esc key fails you, or if you either can’t see or can’t click the “Close” button…well, you’ll probably just close that browser tab. This situation can prove even more infuriating for users with low vision or cognitive disabilities. So, if new content appears when your user hovers over or tabs on to some element, you should make sure that: your user can dismiss that content without needing to move their pointer or tab on to some other element (this doesn’t apply to error warnings, or well-behaved content that doesn’t obscure or replace other content); the new content remains visible while your user moves their cursor over it; the new content remains visible as long as the user hovers over that element or dismisses that content—or until the new content is no longer valid. This doesn’t apply to situations such as hovering over an element’s title attribute, where the user’s browser controls the display of the content that appears. Can users operate the controls and links on your website? The second guideline has criteria that help you prevent your users from asking, “How the **** does this thing work?” We’ve nine new criteria for this guideline. 2.1.4 Some websites offer keyboard shortcuts for users. For example, the keyboard shortcuts for Gmail allow the user to press the ⇧ key and u to mark a message as unread. Usually, shortcuts on websites include modifier keys, such as Ctrl, along with a letter, number, or punctuation symbol. Unfortunately, users who have dexterity challenges sometimes trigger those shortcuts by accident, and that can make a website impossible to use. Also, speech input technology can sometimes trigger those shortcuts. If your website offers single-character keyboard shortcuts, you must allow your user to turn off or remap those shortcuts. This doesn’t apply to single-character keyboard shortcuts that only work when a control, such as drop-down list, has focus. 2.2.6 If your website uses a timeout for some process, you could store the user’s data for at least 20 hours, so that users with cognitive disabilities can take a break or take longer than usual to complete the process without losing their place or losing their data. Alternatively, you could warn the user, at the start of the process, about that the website will timeout after whatever amount of time you have chosen. 2.3.3 If your website has some non-essential animation (such as parallax scrolling) that starts when the user does some particular action, you could allow the user to turn off that animation so that you avoid harming users with vestibular disorders. The prefers-reduced-motion media query currently has limited browser support, but you can start using it now to avoid showing animations to users who select the “Reduce Motion” setting (or equivalent) in their device’s operating system: @media (prefers-reduced-motion: reduce) { .MrFancyPants { animation: none; } } 2.5.1 Some websites let users use multi-touch gestures on touchscreen devices. For example, Google Maps allows users to pinch with two fingers to zoom out and “unpinch” with two fingers to zoom in. Also, some websites allow users to drag a finger to do some action, such as changing the value on an input element with type=""range"", or swiping sideways to the next photograph in a gallery. Some users with dexterity challenges, and some users who use a head pointer, an eye-gaze system, or speech-controlled mouse emulation, might find multi-touch gestures or dragging impossible. You must make sure that your website supports single-tap alternatives to any multi-touch gestures or dragging actions that it provides. For example, if your website lets someone pinch and unpinch a map to zoom in and out, you must also provide buttons that a user can tap to zoom in and out. 2.5.2 This might be my favourite accessibility criterion ever! Did you ever touch or press a “Send” button but then immediately realise that you really didn’t want to send the message, and so move your finger or cursor away from the “Send” button before lifting your finger?! Imagine how many arguments that functionality has prevented. 😌 You must make sure that touching or pressing does not cause anything to happen before the user raises their finger or cursor, or make sure that the user can move their finger or cursor away to prevent the action. In JavaScript, prefer onclick to onmousedown, unless your website has actions that need onmousedown. Also, this doesn’t apply to actions that need to happen as soon as the user clicks or touches. For example, a user playing a “Whac-A-Mole” game or a piano emulator needs the action to happen as soon as they click or touch the screen. 2.5.3 Recently, entrepreneur and social media guru Gary Vaynerchuk has emphasised the rise of audio and voice as output and input. He quotes a Google statistic that says one in five search queries use voice input. Once again, users with disabilities have been ahead of the curve here, having used screen readers and/or dictation software for many years. You must make sure that the text that appears on a form control or image matches how your HTML identifies that form control or image. Use proper semantic HTML to achieve this: use the label element to pair text with the corresponding input element; use an alt attribute value that exactly matches any text that appears in an image; use an aria-labelledby attribute value that exactly matches the text that appears in any complex component. 2.5.4 Modern Web APIs allow web developers to specify how their website will react to the user shaking, tilting, or gesturing towards their device. Some users might find those actions difficult, impossible, or embarrassing to perform. If you make any functionality available when the user shakes, tilts, or gestures towards their device, you must provide form controls that make that same functionality available. As usual, this doesn’t apply to websites that require shaking, tilting, or gesturing; this includes some games and music programmes. John Gruber describes the iPhone’s “Shake to Undo” gesture as “dreadful — impossible to discover through exploration of the on-screen [user interface], bad for accessibility, and risks your phone flying out of your hand”. This accessibility criterion seems to empathise with John: you must make sure that your user can prevent your website from responding to shaking, tilting and/or gesturing towards their device. 2.5.5 Homer Simpson’s telephone famously complained, “The fingers you have used to dial are too fat.” I think we’ve all felt like that when using phones and tablets, particularly when trying to dismiss pop-ups and ads. You could make interactive elements at least 44px wide × 44px high. Apple’s “Human Interface Guidelines” agree: “Provide ample touch targets for interactive elements. Try to maintain a minimum tappable area of 44pt x 44pt for all controls.” This doesn’t apply to links within inline text, or to unsoiled elements. 2.5.6 Expect your users to use a variety of input devices they want, and to change from one to another whenever they please. For example, a user with a tablet and keyboard might jab icons on the screen while typing on the keyboard, or a user might dictate text while alone and then type on a keyboard when a colleague arrives. You could make sure that your website allows your users to use whichever available input modality they choose. Once again, this doesn’t apply to websites that require a specific modality; this includes typing tutors and music programmes. Can users understand your content? The third guideline has criteria that help you prevent your users from asking, “What the **** does this mean?” We’ve no new criteria for this guideline. Have you made your website robust enough to work on your users’ browsers and assistive technologies? The fourth and final guideline has criteria that help you prevent your users from asking, “Why the **** doesn’t this work on my device?” We’ve one new criterion for this guideline. 4.1.3 Sometimes you need to let your user know the status of something: “Did it work OK? What was the error? How far through it are we?” However, you should avoid making your user lose their place on the webpage, and so you should let them know the status without opening a new window, focusing on another element, or submitting a form. To do this properly for assistive technology users, choose the appropriate ARIA role for the new content; for example: if your user needs to know, “Did it work OK?”, add role=""status”; if your user needs to know, “What was the error?”, add role=""alert”; if you user needs to know, “How far through it are we?”, add role=""log"" (for a chat window) or role=""progressbar"" (for, well, a progress bar). Better design for humans My favourite of Luke Wroblewski’s collection of Design Quotes is, “Design is the art of gradually applying constraints until only one solution remains,” from that most prolific author, “Unknown”. I’ve always viewed the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines as people-based constraints, and liked how they help the design process. With these 17 new web content accessibility criteria, go forth and create solutions that more people than ever before can use. Spending those book vouchers you got for Christmas What next? If you’re looking for something to do to keep you busy this Christmas, I thoroughly recommend these four books for increasing your accessibility expertise: “Pro HTML5 Accessibility” by Joshue O Connor (Head of Accessibility (Interim) at the UK Government Digital Service, Director of InterAccess, and one of the editors of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1): Although this book is six years old—a long time in web design—I find it an excellent go-to resource. It begins by explaining how people with disabilities use the web, and then expertly explains modern HTML in that context. “A Web for Everyone—Designing Accessible User Experiences” by Sarah Horton (the Paciello Group’s UX Strategy Lead) and Whitney Quesenbery (the Center for Civic Design’s co-director): This book covers the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, the principles of Universal Design, and design thinking. Its personas for Accessible UX and its profiles of well-known industry figures—including some 24ways authors—keep its content practical and relevant throughout. “Accessibility For Everyone” by Laura Kalbag (Ind.ie’s co-founder and designer, and 24ways author): This book is just over a year old, and so serves as a great resource for up-to-date coverage of guidelines, laws, and accessibility features of operating systems—as well as content, design, coding, and testing. The audiobook, which Laura narrates, can help you and your colleagues go from having little or no understanding of web accessibility, to becoming familiar with all aspects of web accessibility—in less than four hours. “Just Ask: Integrating Accessibility Throughout Design” by Shawn Lawton Henry (the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)’s Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)’s Outreach Coordinator): Although this book is 11½ years old, the way it presents accessibility as part of the User-Centered Design process is timeless. I found its section on Usability Testing with people with disabilities particularly useful.",2018,Alan Dalton,alandalton,2018-12-03T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2018/wcag-for-people-who-havent-read-the-update/,ux 262,Be the Villain,"Inclusive Design is the practice of making products and services accessible to, and usable by as many people as reasonably possible without the need for specialized accommodations. The practice was popularized by author and User Experience Design Director Kat Holmes. If getting you to discover her work is the only thing this article succeeds in doing then I’ll consider it a success. As a framework for creating resilient solutions to problems, Inclusive Design is incredible. However, the aimless idealistic aspirations many of its newer practitioners default to can oftentimes run into trouble. Without outlining concrete, actionable outcomes that are then vetted by the people you intend to serve, there is the potential to do more harm than good. When designing, you take a user flow and make sure it can’t be broken. Ensuring that if something is removed, it can be restored. Or that something editable can also be updated at a later date—you know, that kind of thing. What we want to do is avoid surprises. Much like a water slide with a section of pipe missing, a broken flow forcibly ejects a user, to great surprise and frustration. Interactions within a user flow also have to be small enough to be self-contained, so as to avoid creating a none pizza with left beef scenario. Lately, I’ve been thinking about how to expand on this practice. Watertight user flows make for a great immediate experience, but it’s all too easy to miss the forest for the trees when you’re a product designer focused on cranking out features. What I’m concerned about is while to trying to envision how a user flow could be broken, you also think about how it could be subverted. In addition to preventing the removal of a section of water slide, you also keep someone from mugging the user when they shoot out the end. If you pay attention, you’ll start to notice this subversion with increasing frequency: Domestic abusers using internet-controlled devices to spy on and control their partner. Zealots tanking a business’ rating on Google because its owners spoke out against unchecked gun violence. Forcing people to choose between TV or stalking because the messaging center portion of a cable provider’s entertainment package lacks muting or blocking features. White supremacists tricking celebrities into endorsing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Facebook repeatedly allowing housing, credit, and employment advertisers to discriminate against users by their race, ability, and religion. White supremacists also using a video game chat service as a recruiting tool. The unchecked harassment of minors on Instagram. Swatting. If I were to guess why we haven’t heard more about this problem, I’d say that optimistically, people have settled out of court. Pessimistically, it’s most likely because we ignore, dismiss, downplay, and suppress those who try to bring it to our attention. Subverted design isn’t the practice of employing Dark Patterns to achieve your business goals. If you are not familiar with the term, Dark Patterns are the use of cheap user interface tricks and psychological manipulation to get users to act against their own best interests. User Experience consultant Chris Nodder wrote Evil By Design, a fantastic book that unpacks how to detect and think about them, if you’re interested in this kind of thing Subverted design also isn’t beholden design, or simple lack of attention. This phenomenon isn’t even necessarily premeditated. I think it arises from naïve (or willfully ignorant) design decisions being executed at a historically unprecedented pace and scale. These decisions are then preyed on by the shrewd and opportunistic, used to control and inflict harm on the undeserving. Have system, will game. This is worth discussing. As the field of design continues to industrialize empathy, it also continues to ignore the very established practice of threat modeling. Most times, framing user experience in terms of how to best funnel people into a service comes with an implicit agreement that the larger system that necessitates the service is worth supporting. To achieve success in the eyes of their superiors, designers may turn to emotional empathy exercises. By projecting themselves into the perceived surface-level experiences of others, they play-act at understanding how to nudge their targeted demographics into a conversion funnel. This roleplaying exercise has the effect of scoping concerns to the immediate, while simultaneously reinforcing the idea of engagement at all cost within the identified demographic. The thing is, pure engagement leaves the door wide open for bad actors. Even within the scope of a limited population, the assumption that everyone entering into the funnel is acting with good intentions is a poor one. Security researchers, network administrators, and other professionals who practice threat modeling understand that the opposite is true. By preventing everyone save for well-intentioned users from operating a system within the parameters you set for them, you intentionally limit the scope of abuse that can be enacted. Don’t get me wrong: being able to escort as many users as you can to the happy path is a foundational skill. But we should also be having uncomfortable conversations about why something unthinkable may in fact not be. They’re not going to be fun conversations. It’s not going to be easy convincing others that these aren’t paranoid delusions best tucked out of sight in the darkest, dustiest corner of the backlog. Realistically, talking about it may even harm your career. But consider the alternative. The controlled environment of the hypothetical allows us to explore these issues without propagating harm. Better to be viewed as the office’s resident villain than to have to live with something like this: If the past few years have taught us anything, it’s that the choices we make—or avoid making—have consequences. Design has been doing a lot of growing up as of late, including waking up to the idea that technology isn’t neutral. You’re going to have to start thinking the way a monster does—if you can imagine it, chances are someone else can as well. To get into this kind of mindset, inverting the Inclusive Design Principles is a good place to start: Providing a comparable experience becomes forcing a single path. Considering situation becomes ignoring circumstance. Being consistent becomes acting capriciously. Giving control becomes removing autonomy. Offering choice becomes limiting options. Prioritizing content becomes obfuscating purpose. Adding value becomes filling with gibberish. Combined, these inverted principles start to paint a picture of something we’re all familiar with: a half-baked, unscrupulous service that will jump at the chance to take advantage of you. This environment is also a perfect breeding ground for spawning bad actors. These kinds of services limit you in the ways you can interact with them. They kick you out or lock you in if you don’t meet their unnamed criteria. They force you to parse layout, prices, and policies that change without notification or justification. Their controls operate in ways that are unexpected and may shift throughout the experience. Their terms are dictated to you, gaslighting you to extract profit. Heaps of jargon and flashy, unnecessary features are showered on you to distract from larger structural and conceptual flaws. So, how else can we go about preventing subverted design? Marli Mesibov, Content Strategist and Managing Editor of UX Booth, wrote a brilliant article about how to use Dark Patterns for good—perhaps the most important takeaway being admitting you have a problem in the first place. Another exercise is asking the question, “What is the evil version of this feature?” Ask it during the ideation phase. Ask it as part of acceptance criteria. Heck, ask it over lunch. I honestly don’t care when, so long as the question is actually raised. In keeping with the spirit of this article, we can also expand on this line of thinking. Author, scientist, feminist, and pacifist Ursula Franklin urges us to ask, “Whose benefits? Whose risks?” instead of “What benefits? What risks?” in her talk, When the Seven Deadly Sins Became the Seven Cardinal Virtues. Inspired by the talk, Ethan Marcotte discusses how this relates to the web platform in his powerful post, Seven into seven. Few things in this world are intrinsically altruistic or good—it’s just the nature of the beast. However, that doesn’t mean we have to stand idly by when harm is created. If we can add terms like “anti-pattern” to our professional vocabulary, we can certainly also incorporate phrases like “abuser flow.” Design finally got a seat at the table. We should use this newfound privilege wisely. Listen to women. Listen to minorities, listen to immigrants, the unhoused, the less economically advantaged, and the less technologically-literate. Listen to the underrepresented and the underprivileged. Subverted design is a huge problem, likely one that will never completely go away. However, the more of us who put the hard work into being the villain, the more we can lessen the scope of its impact.",2018,Eric Bailey,ericbailey,2018-12-06T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2018/be-the-villain/,ux 267,Taming Complexity,"I’m going to step into my UX trousers for this one. I wouldn’t usually wear them in public, but it’s Christmas, so there’s nothing wrong with looking silly. Anyway, to business. Wherever I roam, I hear the familiar call for simplicity and the denouncement of complexity. I read often that the simpler something is, the more usable it will be. We understand that simple is hard to achieve, but we push for it nonetheless, convinced it will make what we build easier to use. Simple is better, right? Well, I’ll try to explore that. Much of what follows will not be revelatory to some but, like all good lessons, I think this serves as a welcome reminder that as we live in a complex world it’s OK to sometimes reflect that complexity in the products we build. Myths and legends Less is more, we’ve been told, ever since master of poetic verse Robert Browning used the phrase in 1855. Well, I’ve conducted some research, and it appears he knew nothing of web design. Neither did modernist architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, a later pedlar of this worthy yet contradictory notion. Broad is narrow. Tall is short. Eggs are chips. See: anyone can come up with this stuff. To paraphrase Einstein, simple doesn’t have to be simpler. In other words, simple doesn’t dictate that we remove the complexity. Complex doesn’t have to be confusing; it can be beautiful and elegant. On the web, complex can be necessary and powerful. A website that simplifies the lives of its users by offering them everything they need in one site or screen is powerful. For some, the greater the density of information, the more useful the site. In our decision-making process, principles such as Occam’s razor’s_razor (in a nutshell: simple is better than complex) are useful, but simple is for the user to determine through their initial impression and subsequent engagement. What appears simple to me or you might appear very complex to someone else, based on their own mental model or needs. We can aim to deliver simple, but they’ll be the judge. As a designer, developer, content alchemist, user experience discombobulator, or whatever you call yourself, you’re often wrestling with a wealth of material, a huge number of features, and numerous objectives. In many cases, much of that stuff is extraneous, and goes in the dustbin. However, it can be just as likely that there’s a truckload of suggested features and content because it all needs to be there. Don’t be afraid of that weight. In the right hands, less can indeed mean more, but it’s just as likely that less can very often lead to, well… less. Complexity is powerful Simple is the ability to offer a powerful experience without overwhelming the audience or inducing information anxiety. Giving them everything they need, without having them ferret off all over a site to get things done, is important. It’s useful to ask throughout a site’s lifespan, “does the user have everything they need?” It’s so easy to let our designer egos get in the way and chop stuff out, reduce down to only the things we want to see. That benefits us in the short term, but compromises the audience long-term. The trick is not to be afraid of complexity in itself, but to avoid creating the perception of complexity. Give a user a flight simulator and they’ll crash the plane or jump out. Give them everything they need and more, but make it feel simple, and you’re building a relationship, empowering people. This can be achieved carefully with what some call gradual engagement, and often the sensible thing might be to unleash complexity in carefully orchestrated phases, initially setting manageable levels of engagement and interaction, gradually increasing the inherent power of the product and fostering an empowered community. The design aesthetic Here’s a familiar scenario: the client or project lead gets overexcited and skips most of the important decision-making, instead barrelling straight into a bout of creative direction Tourette’s. Visually, the design needs to be minimal, white, crisp, full of white space, have big buttons, and quite likely be “clean”. Of course, we all like our websites to be clean as that’s more hygienic. But what do these words even mean, really? Early in a project they’re abstract distractions, unnecessary constraints. This premature narrowing forces us to think much more about throwing stuff out rather than acknowledging that what we’re building is complex, and many of the components perhaps necessary. Simple is not a formula. It cannot be achieved just by using a white background, by throwing things away, or by breathing a bellowsful of air in between every element and having it all float around in space. Simple is not a design treatment. Simple is hard. Simple requires deep investigation, a thorough understanding of every aspect of a project, in line with the needs and expectations of the audience. Recognizing this helps us empathize a little more with those most vocal of UX practitioners. They usually appreciate that our successes depend on a thorough understanding of the user’s mental models and expected outcomes. I personally still consider UX people to be web designers like the rest of us (mainly to wind them up), but they’re web designers that design every decision, and by putting the user experience at the heart of their process, they have a greater chance of finding simplicity in complexity. The visual design aesthetic — the façade — is only a part of that. Divide and conquer I’m currently working on an app that’s complex in architecture, and complex in ambition. We’ll be releasing in carefully orchestrated private phases, gradually introducing more complexity in line with the unavoidably complex nature of the objective, but my job is to design the whole, the complete system as it will be when it’s out of beta and beyond. I’ve noticed that I’m not throwing much out; most of it needs to be there. Therefore, my responsibility is to consider interesting and appropriate methods of navigation and bring everything together logically. I’m using things like smart defaults, graphical timelines and colour keys to make sense of the complexity, techniques that are sympathetic to the content. They act as familiar points of navigation and reference, yet are malleable enough to change subtly to remain relevant to the information they connect. It’s really OK to have a lot of stuff, so long as we make each component work smartly. It’s a divide and conquer approach. By finding simplicity and logic in each content bucket, I’ve made more sense of the whole, allowing me to create key layouts where most of the simplified buckets are collated and sometimes combined, providing everything the user needs and expects in the appropriate places. I’m also making sure I don’t reduce the app’s power. I need to reflect the scale of opportunity, and provide access to or knowledge of the more advanced tools and features for everyone: a window into what they can do and how they can help. I know it’s the minority who will be actively building the content, but the power is in providing those opportunities for all. Much of this will be familiar to the responsible practitioners who build websites for government, local authorities, utility companies, newspapers, magazines, banking, and we-sell-everything-ever-made online shops. Across the web, there are sites and tools that thrive on complexity. Alas, the majority of such sites have done little to make navigation intuitive, or empower audiences. Where we can make a difference is by striving to make our UIs feel simple, look wonderful, not intimidating — even if they’re mind-meltingly complex behind that façade. Embrace, empathize and tame So, there are loads of ways to exploit complexity, and make it seem simple. I’ve hinted at some methods above, and we’ve already looked at gradual engagement as a way to make sense of complexity, so that’s a big thumbs-up for a release cycle that increases audience power. Prior to each and every release, it’s also useful to rest on the finished thing for a while and use it yourself, even if you’re itching to release. ‘Ready’ often isn’t, and ‘finished’ never is, and the more time you spend browsing around the sites you build, the more you learn what to question, where to add, or subtract. It’s definitely worth building in some contingency time for sitting on your work, so to speak. One thing I always do is squint at my layouts. By squinting, I get a sort of abstract idea of the overall composition, and general feel for the thing. It makes my face look stupid, but helps me see how various buckets fit together, and how simple or complex the site feels overall. I mentioned the need to put our design egos to one side and not throw out anything useful, and I think that’s vital. I’m a big believer in economy, reduction, and removing the extraneous, but I’m usually referring to decoration, bells and whistles, and fluff. I wouldn’t ever advocate the complete removal of powerful content from a project roadmap. Above all, don’t fear complexity. Embrace and tame it. Work hard to empathize with audience needs, and you can create elegant, playful, risky, surprising, emotive, delightful, and ultimately simple things.",2011,Simon Collison,simoncollison,2011-12-21T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2011/taming-complexity/,ux 269,Adaptive Images for Responsive Designs… Again,"When I was asked to write an article for 24 ways I jumped at the chance, as I’d been wanting to write about some fun hacks for responsive images and related parsing behaviours. My heart sank a little when Matt Wilcox beat me to the subject, but it floated back up when I realized I disagreed with his method and still had something to write about. So, Matt Wilcox, if that is your real name (and I’m pretty sure it is), I disagree. I see your dirty server-based hack and raise you an even dirtier client-side hack. Evil laugh, etc., etc. You guys can stomach yet another article about responsive design, right? Right? Half the room gets up to leave Whoa, whoa… OK, I’ll cut to the chase… TL;DR In a previous episode, we were introduced to Debbie and her responsive cat poetry page. Well, now she’s added some reviews of cat videos and some images of cats. Check out her new page and have a play around with the browser window. At smaller widths, the images change and the design responds. The benefits of this method are: it’s entirely client-side images are still shown to users without JavaScript your media queries stay in your CSS file no repetition of image URLs no extra downloads per image it’s fast enough to work on resize it’s pure filth What’s wrong with the server-side solution? Responsive design is a client-side issue; involving the server creates a boatload of problems. It sets a cookie at the top of the page which is read in subsequent requests. However, the cookie is not guaranteed to be set in time for requests on the same page, so the server may see an old value or no value at all. Serving images via server scripts is much slower than plain old static hosting. The URL can only cache with vary: cookie, so the cache breaks when the cookie changes, even if the change is unrelated. Also, far-future caching is out for devices that can change width. It depends on detecting screen width, which is rather messy on mobile devices. Responding to things other than screen width (such as DPI) means packing more information into the cookie, and a more complicated script at the top of each page. So, why isn’t this straightforward on the client? Client-side solutions to the problem involve JavaScript testing user agent properties (such as screen width), looping through some images and setting their URLs accordingly. However, by the time JavaScript has sprung into action, the original image source has already started downloading. If you change the source of an image via JavaScript, you’re setting off yet another request. Images are downloaded as soon as their DOM node is created. They don’t need to be visible, they don’t need to be in the document. new Image().src = url The above will start an HTTP request for url. This is a handy trick for quick requests and preloading, but also shows the browser’s eagerness to download images. Here’s an example of that in action. Check out the network tab in Web Inspector (other non-WebKit development aids are available) to see the image requests. Because of this, some client-side solutions look like this: where t.gif is a 1×1px tiny transparent GIF. This results in no images if JavaScript isn’t available. Dealing with the absence of JavaScript is still important, even on mobile. I was recently asked to make a website work on an old Blackberry 9000. I was able to get most of the way there by preventing that OS parsing any JavaScript, and that was only possible because the site didn’t depend on it. We need to delay loading images for JavaScript users, but ensure they load for users without JavaScript. How can we conditionally parse markup depending on JavaScript support? Oh yeah!