Here are 10 reasons you should hire Annie Valdes:

1. She has an MBA in Marketing from Georgia State University.
2. She has a BA in Anthropology from Emory University.
3. She has a background in design and usability.
4. Put 1, 2, and 3 together and you get someone with a solid background in tackling big U usability.
5. She’s an extrovert and I am not. Even though I pulled her up on stage in front of 400 usability people to help do some improv. But she topped everyone by yelling out, “Hire me,” which I still think was bloody brilliant. More on that story to follow.
6. She gets people to open up about all sorts of topics even when she’s only known them for a few days.
7. She is an active member in organizations related to usability.
8. She is freakin’ hilarious. Which you wouldn’t think to find as a job requirement, but frankly I think it needs to start happening. A lot of people can do the job, but you don’t necessarily want to work with them. That wouldn’t apply in Annie’s case.
9. She is freakin’ smart. Even smarter than me. Okay, that might not be helping her case.
10. She has a strong desire to optimize your organization’s world. Making it a better place for your employees and your customers.

Okay, perhaps that was helpful, perhaps not. All I can say is that if I were in a position to hire someone, Annie would be a top pick. I won’t make a habit of posting candidates (in much the same way OK/Cancel posts jobs), but I think Annie’s background and drive are worth noting.

So, email Annie and offer her a job.

I took a few more pictures at the conference than I have put with the posts. Enjoy!

He also (like me) wants to make the world more usable and useful. Here’s how he suggests looking for opportunities to do it… Steve gave a presentation on (essentially) data mining for information about emerging markets from sources like the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Global Edge, TradeStats Express™ National Trade Data, and even the World Factbook published by our good friends at the CIA (hi Dan!).

The idea is to look to the information for demographics of the emerging markets to extrapolate some user characteristics of the populations. As we all know there are some basic user characteristics that can heavily impact design choices if they are known. One example he used was colorblindness. If China is your market, it might impact your design choice to remember that there are 48.8 million (extrapolated number) people with this type of vision deficiency.

Another vision-related example Steve used was blindness. From the presentation:

• 180 million people worldwide have a visual impairment.
• 40-45 million persons are blind.
• 90% of the world’s blind population live in developing countries.
• Approximately 50% of the world’s blindness is the result of cataracts.
• China accounts for about 18% of the world’s blind population.

As a designer, you could look at this information as backup for talking to your company about changes to designs, especially if said company wants to work in emerging markets. Most companies without designers who understand (or care about) accessibility issues will be leaving certain aspects of targeted markets untapped. So this isn’t just an issue of accessibility, it’s an issue of potentially identifying a much lower level opportunity cost than is needed.

Another example given (and because of my writing background I really like this one) is writing content in simplified english. He gave four reasons why a company would want to do this:

• Reduces the cost of language translation
• Reduces ambiguity and liability
• Speeds reading
• Improves understanding for ESL users

The one I like the most is the first one. Companies spend millions of dollars each year translating their english content into dozens of other languages. Typically they use software as a first run on the translation, then have a person clean things up. If the content was written in simplified english, the software would be more accurate, and the people would spend less time (which equates to money) cleaning up the text.

There were many other examples, but what I liked in particular about this presentation is that Steve was challenging the audience to think like an entrepreneur, not just a yes monkey that is limited to the scope of the company’s current endeavors.

So check out some of those links above and start thinking about how your company can start to tap, and optimize emerging markets around the world. You could be creating a whole new line of business for you company just by thinking about some of the design constraints in these markets. As I have found, understanding your constraints leads to better opportunities with your designs.

The presentation, by Paul McInerney of IBM Canada, was listed at being for Experienced Practitioners, but should have been rated for “everyone.” The room was packed and there was an overall feeling of disappointment (my assessment). Not necessarily in the presenter, just in perceived value.

It was an overview of the different formats of task analysis with commentary on the benefits and detractions of each. He listed five formats for task analysis:

• Hierarchical
• Sequential
• Attributes
• Case (holistic detail, based on a particular person, environment, or scenario, etc.)
• user-system interaction (function allocation table)

One thing I don’t think the people who questioned him understood, is that these are just formats for representing the core data different ways depending on the level of detail needed and the audience which would be needing the data.

Anyway, slight disappointment, so I’ll just leave it at that.

Lisa Battle is working with the Social Security Administration. She is a contractor from Lockheed-Martin.

Quick background on the presentation directly from the proceedings:

Recognizing that the Usability Center [of the Social Security Administration] staff cannot offer the same level of committed resources to every project, Mr. Wheeler started an initiative to define levels of service. We reflected on our project experiences over the past few years and categorized them in terms of the degree of involvement that we had—including some that were intensive, full-time projects with two or more designers, and others where our involvement was brief or occasional. We also thought about how to position the Usability Center’s services in the future. The intention was to use the levels of service both to encourage moving our methods out and to manage the demand for services.

In the end, we defined four levels of service:

• Full service user-centered design
• Specific activity consulting
• Project team mentoring
• Do-it-yourself guidance

Their levels of service are similar to my recently explanation to a project manager (PM) about some different options I saw in proceeding on a project. I used a gold, silver, and bronze level of service explanation and left it up to the PM to decide what level of service he thought was appropriate. I gave him my take on which level was appropriate given the time and budget constraints and he agreed. He also thanks me for putting the decision in an easy to understand way.

But since this type of thing has come up before, perhaps it would be a better thing to put together a more rigorous decision making tool to help figure out what level of service are needed for different types of work efforts.

It would also help document why the designer chose the level of service and not relegating it to a gut feeling. Which isn’t always bad, but you also can’t track/trend the information over time.

For example, as a manager you could track how many bronze projects your people did last year. Maybe there are a lot and you might want to find out why. There could be many reasons. Products getting better over time, fewer products being developed, fewer features. People not liking the service you are providing. Designers too quickly jumping to bronze level because it seems easier.

Also, with respect to the levels offered by the SSA’s Usability Center, you may start to notice a trend in DIY projects which would offer you an opportunity to examine products from a QA perspective to see if even in DIY mode the projects are meeting overall requirements in usability.

I will follow up to see if the information is shareable. I know there will be a link to much supporting documentation on the “post conference” page.

Robert Bailey and Kent Bailey

One of the aspects of usability testing, in whatever form it manifests itself, is the fact there there is a lot of data to go through. The tool and process that Bob and Kent were demo’ing is something they have been building to help expedite the process of testing.

The tool itself is in early stages of development. They have been using it in some government Web sites recently, but they also spoke often (usually in answering “will it do x” questions) about features they are going to be adding.

The tool is spilt into two interfaces; one for test management and one for test facilitation. The idea is that this tool can be used remotely or in a lab setting. You can choose to track many different aspects of interaction, set starting and stopping points of a test (via entered URL), set how many steps the user can take before you (the tool) set them back on track. It tracks mouse clicks, whether they used the mouse wheel, or dragged or clicked the scroll bar.

Everything is of course time stamped and sequenced in order of action. The interface for the tool could use some work. It’s still very GUI with a gray background and everything, but as I said before they are still building the tool. It is not Web-based which could be a detractor. You have to download it, but they have set it up so the tool deletes itself after sending the data back to the specified address.

The tool they showed helps standardize the features of your test, so you set up all your failure and success criteria before the test actually happens (isn’t that a good idea).

Someone in the audience asked how this tool compared to Vividence or similar online tools. Bob mentioned that they share aspects, but the idea behind their tool is to make tests more effective and efficient for the tester, which he said was a different impetus from the other products mentioned.

Tool also has satisfaction questionnaire built in.

Requirements used in building the tool (overview list for the purposes of the presentation):

• Present test subjects with one or more tasks to perform using the Internet or intranet
• Transparently watch what they do & record all interactions
• Time them
• Intervene when they go too far astray
• Know when they are finished
• Elicit comments and explanations from them
• Compile and analyze results from multiple subjects
• Automatically generate reports in a standardized format
• Be easily configured by non-technical personnel

Things the tool reports on:

• Automatically produces a report
• Offers standardized reporting
• Automatically conducts statistical analyses
• ¤Statistical significance (t—tests, F—tests)
• ¤Correlations (e.g., age and task success)
• ¤Detection of outliers (> 4 standard deviations)
• Automatically compares with
  • ¤Usability objectives
  • ¤Previous usability test results
• Can produce a test report the same day the data are collected

This would be a good tool for my work at my company because often when I am doing informal (not in lab) testing I am on my own, so it is difficult to be facilitator, note taker, observer, and tech support (if the prototype baulks during testing:). Especially if I am visiting multiple participants in one day. I am so tired, often, that it is hard to sit down at the end of the day and compile notes. If I had something like this tool I could primarily focus on observation and facilitation.

And if you are wondering why I keep saying “tool,” it’s because there isn’t a name for it yet. :)

[Edit: Obviously I misunderstood the answer, so I edited the following paragraph based on information from the comment below.]

If you want to find out about using the tool, contact Bob or Kent. For a while (based on my understanding of an audience question) the tool is in the public domain because it is being developed for the US government (the National Cancer Institute to be precise), but as with most things like this it will eventually be offered out of the private sector.

While some phases of development were under contract with some Federal agencies to use in testing of agency websites, Bob and Kent retain the copyright on the software. They expect to have a commercial version of the software available by the end of this year.

From left to right: Kirsten (Bently), Amanda (Georgia Tech), Dana (CMU), Jessica (Tufts), and Rebecca (UMich).

There are many slides which I will have to ask permission later to upload here. Each person is talking about their own background and the program which they are attending.

I know quite a bit about most of these programs, though not so much about Tufts. Still, most of the “big name” HCI schools don’t offer much in the way of distance learning, which is something I am interested in. Unless or until I get a job in the same city as one of these universities I will be relegated to cog psych classes at Illinois State University.

Bently has a 3 year program for MBA/HCI. Think of this combination in terms of usefulness/usability. This is something I think people should start thinking about if they aren’t already. More and more, HCIers are finding that having a good understanding of business processes, politics, and overall machinations is a good thing. Domain business knowledge is one thing, and for those starting out in the field, I think this isn’t as necessary, though it does fall into the “would be nice” category.

Understanding business though will help get buy in on everything that an HCIer brings to the table. As I have said in the past, I don’t talk about UCD in meetings with technical and business people anymore. I talk in terms of business.

Hitting the ground running with this concept will make you more successful in the business world, especially if you are an employee. I am not sure as much from the consultant perspective. Certainly a business understanding is good to have because you are running your own business, but typically you are brought in to solve an HCI problem. Your client expects you to talk about the HCI issues and be the geek no one else at the company can be. :)

Any consultants care to comment?

One thing that seems to be a theme in the backgrounds of the professors in these programs is that it is multi-disciplinary: social scientists, psychologists, designers… Hm, kinda like those who staff the current field. We all come from different, but similar backgrounds. I have a writing background and came to this HCI world through Tech Writing. Tech Writing is a very closely related field to most HCI areas of profession.

What is your background? Did you purposefully pursue a degree or background in HCI, or did you stumble into it, much like I did?

As I said in an earlier post, conference attendance is up this year. at the beginning of the plenary it was announced that the almost final tally is around 470.

The conference theme is Connecting Communities. So a lot of Ginny Redish’s talk is about community. She led us through an exercise that got us to think about the communities to which we belong, which of course got me thinking about my own communities.

Nothing beats showing up. I belong to many online communities, and those are the ones I have the most daily interaction with. I also belong to many other communities in real life too, but with the exception of work, I don’t really get much interaction with any of them. So coming to UPA is a treat. Yes, for much of the year my involvement with this community is online, but it is not a virtual community like this one, Tribe, or WebWord.

It’s nice, even giving my recent musings on introversion, to add more of my senses to the interaction mix. And that’s why it is so important to show up. Even with my memory, I won’t forget this conference for many years. I still remember much of UPA 2001.

This room is full of a lot of people I do not know, yet we all share common desires and goals. I do see some people I know. Some people I only see when I come to a conference. I hear the buzz of their conversations, feel the handshakes and being bumped into when stepping up to the coffee urn, see and incredible array of different types of faces. People connecting. Sharing stories. Making contacts.

Particularly sharing stories. I feel that the only thing that defines us as individuals is the stories we share. The stories are specific to our experiences, and our experiences are unique because of many variables. And we can have many stories that define our experiences, but we are not defined in our community without sharing. If no one knows what you are about, your definition in that community is tenuous.

So, while nothing beats showing up, nothing is better than being involved and sharing. Today, think about your communities and your definition in them. Is your definition accurate? Does it need to be refined? I think there are some communities in my world that need refinery, which is why I decided to merge my personal and professional blogs.

And when I look at all the communities in which I am involved it makes me wonder if I am currently involved in too many. So I think I need to review, refine and prioritize. After the conference of course, because this community, while in continuous refinement, is a high priority.

Thank you for being part of my community.

Just got back from the welcoming reception. It was welcoming to most people. Not vegetarians. But that’s not too big a deal. It was nice to have yet another veggie wrap from the hotel restaurant.

But I did get to meet Eileen Quenin who is also blogging the conference.

Tomorrow the main conference begins with the opening plenary given by Ginny Redish.

Should be fun!

So as an introvert, you tend to, when thrown into these situations, to just stand around hoping that somebody comes up to talk to you. Of course that isolation is usually what keep people from talking to you.

So the opening reception is revving up. Lots of people mingling, drinking, debating, drinking. And I am wandering around; hovering at the fringe. I do pretty good in one-on-one situations. I do fine having to speak in front of 300 people. But it is hard to break into a conversation (politely) and become part of the group.

But I am stretching my people skills on purpose this trip. I didn’t specifically get a chance to break into a conversation, but someone did come up to talk to me. Which in this case is a little strange. Regular readers know I am looking for a new job. Passively at this point, ramping up to a solid search in August.

The person that reached out to me was also waiting for some coworkers to arrive. He asked me where i work and what I do. Mentioned meeting the guy who runs my company’s usability lab. As I talked about what I do and my experiences, we came to the conclusion that my company and his company are facing similar organizational challenges. Challenges that don’t necessarily inhibit success, but that could inhibit effectiveness and specifically efficiency in the near future.

Oh, he’s also the hiring manager in his area. Oh, and his area is at Microsoft.

So then my speaking turned a little. I wasn’t at all interviewing, but the things I elaborated upon while talking were influenced, I think, by his comment, “I wouldn’t think of taking you away from a job you love of course, but if you are interested I suggest you take a look at the job board over there.”

So I did. We’ll see what the follow up will be. It would be wonderful to be back on the West Coast. Would it be wonderful working for Microsoft? Given our conversation I think it would be essentially the same. There are aspects of my job that are wonderful and aspects that suck. I think that is a factor of any job. So now that is a given, what next?