Rethinking How We Explain A Method
Frankie Kastenbaum
Experience Designer by day,?Content Creator by night,?in pursuit of demystifying the UX/UI industry | Mentor & Speaker
Over the past few months, I've read a number of UX related books that all mentioned different methodologies for different processes or phases of a project. Recently I noticed that all of those books had one thing in common. And no, I am not talking about UX.
I noticed that every one of those books described the method at hand only from the perspective of an ideal state.
Each one, no matter the topic, only explained how the method would play out if all the steps were completed in that exact same order.
Although this helps to illustrate how the method is to be used, it got me thinking since throughout my career a project has never been completed in the ideal state. Whether it was related to tight time constraints, requirements from stakeholders, or really many other reasons, my process has never been the perfect one on paper.
So as I read those books, I realized it was hard for me to understand how to adapt those methods to fit into my "imperfect" processes.
I found myself questioning if those methods would work if I were to skip a number of the steps? Or if I could start some of those processes in the middle of them?
Even though a lot of my career has been learning from trial and error and that process will continue to help me answer those questions, I found this to be an interesting observation and wanted to call it out.
Specifically, I was curious to hear where you all stood with this concept. Would you find it helpful to see a more realistic description of a method in a book too?
CEO at @Icebreaker.Agency | Launched and optimized 400+ websites | Delivering high-converting UX/UI designs
7 个月I've found that mixing bits from different methodologies based on what actually worked for our team and our timeline constraints works out pretty well but definitely not how any book described it would. Would love to hear more about your 'imperfect' process adaptations!
Uniting Global Entrepreneurs | Founder at NomadEntrepreneur.io | Turning Journeys into Stories of Success ???? Currently, ??♂? Cycling Across the Netherlands!
7 个月Absolutely, perfection is overrated. Adapting methods to real-life scenarios can be challenging. How do you navigate through these imperfections? Frankie Kastenbaum
President - Principal | Insight-driven customer experience design & development
7 个月I find this phenom to be akin to the difference between efficacy in a drug tested in a clinical setting versus one in active use. I would however change imperfect to ever changing. I also believe this gave rise to the shift from "multi-channel" to "omni-channel". There's nothing wrong with typical scenarios, but to your point, they change constantly and as such the mindset of the user does as well. I imagine by the time any UX book is written, hell by the time the author has considered a title, the "method" has already changed multiple times. In summary, there clearly is madness to the method.