re: User Experience Maturity Model - Microsoft Style

Todd — Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:48:41 GMT

I am surprised that product iteration has not warranted a mention in this post! Regardless of who does it, iteration is a key element. I have had experience with one organisation where they regularly use external UI design resources ('advanced' according to above definitions), but because their software lifecycle process is still linear then UI must be done 'correctly' the first time without the chance of any formative design / evaluations. Great if it works, but (as we all attest) it rarely does.

So while 'who' does UX is one indicator, I do think that another indicator is whether the lifecycle typically employed allows for formative feedback.

Another indicator that I have informally used is when does the company in question get the user involved? Never, early, middle, late, or throughout? Do they try and ascertain what the user would actually want from the product up front? Are they only involved during evaluation sessions? Or are they totally ignored?

A few thoughts...

re: User Experience Maturity Model - Microsoft Style

shanemo — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 04:37:58 GMT

You're right Todd - and internally we're talking about a bunch of different indicators, including user involvement and process. WHO does design is just one of them, that I've been thinking about. Perhaps less interesting at the Advanced/Dynamic level, but more telling at basec/standard.

Shane