The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction: Disruptive Innovation

“Knowledge wants to be Free” – this is the fundamental idea behind the Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, a free online portal started by Mads Soegaard with the goal to provide free access to materials written by the world’s foremost authorities – worth thousands of dollars – whether you are from New York or New Delhi.

The site features already 18 chapters incl. HD videos ranging from Interaction Design, User Experience and Experience Design, End-User Development and Open User Innovation. Now the extraordinary feature of this site is that this content is not just summarized by an editor, but instead written by the leading experts in this field. Just as an example, the chapter on Open User Innovation is written by Eric von Hippel, the inventor behind the concepts of lead user research and innovation.

New chapters are published regularly and the next chapter will be released at the end of February 2012. Clayton Christensen, Harvard Professor, NYT best-selling author of the books “The Innovators Dilemma” and “The Innovators Solution” and one of the forerunners of the concept of disruptive innovation is sharing the models and ideas behind his work.

Get early access to the next chapter

As a reader of this blog you can have earlier access to the content on the website. The new chapter introduces the Disruptive Innovation Model that is the underlying model of Christensen’s work. Just folio the link to the chapter on  Disruptive Innovation.

The Zero Moment of Truth: A Free Ebook by Google

Moments of truth make or break a customer’s experience. These critical moments when a customer interacts with a brand are the foundation for understanding and improving the customer experience.

To improve the customer experience it is necessary to understand where the first moment of truth happens.  In retail environments, the first moment of truth happened when a customer interacts with a product on the shelf, the second moment of truth happens when the customer actually uses and experiences a product.

Consumer Behavior is changing, consumers are now using smartphones and other devices to evaluate products and service right at the moment when they are buying the product. This introduces a new category of touch points and moments of truth – the so-called zero moments of truth.

DuckDuckGo and the opportunity of a better search experience

Google has become the dominant search engine not just because it provided the best search but also because it was able to offer a superior search experience. The user interface element that represented this best was the minimalist search box on the Google homepage. The idea that the best search engine makes users leave the site as fast as possible (because they have found the right result) is very powerful but it seems that that over the years this idea has become less important to Google.

To be fair, Google is dealing with several challenges such as search-engine optimization (SEO) spam, the demand for neutrality when listing search results (that’s why it is hard to just remove spam site from the index), the integration of new products  into search (i.e. Google Maps, Google Image Search, Google News) as well as the concept of tailoring search results based on a users social graph.

The problems with personalized search results

All of these changes lead to one outcome: It becomes very difficult to predict the outcome of a search on Google. If you are – like in my situation – using Google when your native language is German, your location is in Switzerland and you are searching for the term “customer experience” it becomes very difficult to predict what results you will get. Depending on wether you are on google.ch in German, google.ch in English or google.com the results will be different. If you are signed in into your Google account, the results will be different again. If you are using multiple Google accounts (I have four Google accounts, 3 of them I use every day) the results will vary as well because your social graph is different.

Filter Bubbles and User Tracking

This phenomenon is called the “filter bubble” and describes the challenge when search results are filtered based on your specific profile. Let’s say you are searching for Barack Obama and your social graph is dominated by friends who are in favour of Obama. Your search results might be dominated by sites that are in favour of Obama as well. If on the other hand your social graph is dominated by friends who are not in favour of Barack Obama, the search results might reflect this. Ultimately this will lead to a situation where we are receiving more of the same content and views that are outside our perspectives or don’t fit into our social graph are filtered out.

Another development of internet search is that search engines track all of your search terms and forward them to the sites that you visit afterwards. This would not be a problem in itself but since most people now have a Google account as well Google knows exactly if you are searching for a new job, trying to find a cure for a hangover or planning a vacation in Spain.

The opportunity for a better search experience

Some entrepreneurs have seen this trend a while ago and have developed a new approach towards internet search. One search engine that is an answer to the filter-bubble and user-tracking is DuckDuckGo, a new and improved search engine that aims to deliver a search experience that gives users more instant answers, less clutter and spam and real privacy. Started by own guy it has grown significantly and recently passed 1 million searches a day.

DuckDuckGo takes a new approach and brings several improvements over the new and “optimized” Google search. Time will tell if DDG will gain enough traction to become a serious challenge to Google and other search engines. DuckDuckGo is not perfect as well, but it is a innovative player in the field of search that is – compared to other new entrants (anyone remember Cuil?) –  gaining traction and might become an relevant player. But even if the presence of DuckDuckgo only brings back a “neutral” search mode to Google – a mode that allows users to perform a search without filtering results based on geography, language or other aspects it would be an important feature to keep

Dieter Rams, Ten Principles for Good Design and a Black Cube

Dieter Rams is a German industrial designer that has worked closely with Braun to design products that have become iconic. The core principle of his designs is “Less, but better” which lead to many memorable products.

Less, but better

This design philosophy can also be observed when looking at Apple products and it turns out that many Apple products are strikingly similar to designs from Dieter Rams while working at Braun (Image via dnaadvertising).

Ten Principles of Good Design

As an extension of his physical creations, Dieter Rams defined ten principles of good design. According to these principles, good design 

• Is innovative - The possibilities for innovation are not, by any means, exhausted. Technological development is always offering new opportunities for innovative design. But innovative design always develops in tandem with innovative technology, and can never be an end in itself.

• Makes a product useful - A product is bought to be used. It has to satisfy certain criteria, not only functional, but also psychological and aesthetic. Good design emphasizes the usefulness of a product whilst disregarding anything that could possibly detract from it.

• Is aesthetic - The aesthetic quality of a product is integral to its usefulness because products are used every day and have an effect on people and their well-being. Only well-executed objects can be beautiful.

• Makes a product understandable - It clarifies the product’s structure. Better still, it can make the product clearly express its function by making use of the user’s intuition. At best, it is self-explanatory.

• Is unobtrusive - Products fulfilling a purpose are like tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained, to leave room for the user’s self-expression.

• Is honest - It does not make a product more innovative, powerful or valuable than it really is. It does not attempt to manipulate the consumer with promises that cannot be kept.

• Is long-lasting - It avoids being fashionable and therefore never appears antiquated. Unlike fashionable design, it lasts many years – even in today’s throwaway society.

• Is thorough down to the last detail - Nothing must be arbitrary or left to chance. Care and accuracy in the design process show respect towards the consumer.

• Is environmentally friendly - Design makes an important contribution to the preservation of the environment. It conserves resources and minimizes physical and visual pollution throughout the lifecycle of the product.

• Is as little design as possible - Less, but better – because it concentrates on the essential aspects, and the products are not burdened with non-essentials. Back to purity, back to simplicity.

Is perfectionism the #1 innovation killer?

A recent article in BusinessWeek discusses the benefits of selling early-stage, imperfect products to increase the success rate of innovation products.

If you had tasted the very first PowerBar, you probably would have gagged.

It was a chewy, tasteless mass of goo: barley malt, nuts, brown rice, molasses, and nutrients blended into a taffy-like bar, packed in a metallic wrapper with a crude logo.

Created by Brian Maxwell in 1986 for a few thousand dollars, PowerBar received mixed initial results. Serious athletes liked it because it met an important need—quick energy during competition—but the taste and consistency needed work.

Maxwell knew his product wasn’t optimal. But by getting feedback on an early version, he was able to modify it, changing the package and marketing strategy to build a following among athletes and weekend warriors.

The idea that it is beneficial to test products with customers as early as possible is not necessarily new. The challenge is that this common sense idea is very hard to implement because it turns out that in many organisations the willingness to experiment and learn from products or services that are not yet perfected is frowned upon.

An additional challenge is that the departments running the daily operations have no incentive to focus on developing the next innovation that will replace their existing products.

An early-stage PowerBar would never get out the door: R&D would want a better formula; packaging would need a more elaborate wrapper; a design agency would have to create the right label; manufacturing and sales would have to weigh in; and the corporate lawyers would insist on a detailed risk analysis.

In order to innovative a team needs to be willing to experiment and learn from early prototypes and customer feedback. Keep that in mind the next time somebody presents a rough PowerPoint or a cardboard prototype.