Mind the research gap: The limits of human-centred design

We’ve lamented the over-reliance on human-centred design language in the design industry for some time now.?

We assume that by simply speaking to end users and integrating their needs into our designs, we can solve the majority of wayfinding problems. Truth is, the wider social aspects of human wayfinding are greatly under-researched and lack critical reflection.?

Idealisation of human-centred design

As the International Organisation for Standardization standard states, human-centred design “is an approach to interactive systems development that aims to make systems usable and useful by focusing on the users, their needs and requirements, and by applying human factors or ergonomics and usability, knowledge and techniques.”?

The “user-first” mentality at the centre of human-centred design has led many to believe that is all they need to do to create spaces and experiences that work and resonate with everyone. Interview some users and replicate what they say they want and voila! Human-centred design is achieved.?

But there is a bit more to the puzzle than that.

Limitations of human-centred design

As a growing field of researchers acknowledge, there are limitations to what human-centred design can accomplish.?

For one, sampling bias is inevitable. Some groups may be overrepresented throughout the investigation and design process.There’s also the ever-present risk of asking the wrong questions, or equally as likely, the wrong people.

Investigation methods such as interviews, focus groups or design sessions can prove fruitful, but they also have their limits. They are also expensive.?

These methods are also hampered by the fact that human-centred design focuses on the individual user, their needs and expectations. Within this micro-context much can be missed, including the social, interpersonal and ethical issues that play a vital role in any good wayfinding design.?

The case for greater consideration of social wayfinding

We aren’t arguing for the abandonment of the existing human-centred design considerations or approaches all together.

What we are pushing for is a more critical consideration of what human-centred design actually is, and what it needs to include to be deserving of that title.

It needs to understand the mechanism and information sources that contribute to individual understanding and navigation decision-making.

It needs to promote human interaction, empathy, and encourage a shared sense of purpose and understanding in a space. It has to consider moments for community building and convergence in ways that feel intuitive, natural and enjoyable. It needs to help deliver a complete model of wayfinding behaviour.?

We still have a long way to go to reach this idealised state. As designers, we aren’t there to simply replicate what users tell us they want from what they have already experienced. We are there to help them imagine a better future that goes beyond what they think is possible.?