I was digging through some reeeeeally old files this morning, and happened upon something I wrote in an agency proposal back in 2000. Of course, that was before we had widespread adoption of the term ‘UX’, and instead talked about ‘usability’ (which doesn’t seem to get as much name-checking these days). Anyway, it would appear I was bigging-up the agency’s holistic approach to interactive product design, or at least my idealised approach, since apparently I made up the whole thing for the purposes of the proposal:
Our design strategy is based on our proprietary quality assurance methodology, which ensures that any proposed solution is assessed against standardised criteria. This methodology (called S.A.F.E.) addressed the following areas:
- Strategy, including measurement against business objectives
- Aesthetic, including brand consistency and appeal
- Function, including navigation and interaction flows
- Editorial, including tone and clarity of language
Because the user must take such an active role in any interactive system, we never underestimate the emotional response a system may solicit. A well-designed system can provide the difference between a satisfying experience and a deeply frustrating one. Our approach to usability takes into account this unique emotional relationship and aims to reduce cognitive workload and dissonance throughout the flow of the system.
Prescience or wanky words? You decide…
It's not the despair. It's the hope. 