About our Blog

Welcome! Here you will find essays on technology, trends and our take on making things work. Beyond that, we post design examples we love, and other cool stuff we find.

Sites We Admire

Friends

Defining User Experience

Posted 04.29.09 by admin

Having been asked the question “what is UX?” on numerous recent occasions, I thought I would spell out my preferred definition here in blog post form. I must start with my rant on the misuse of the word “experience.” Why not. If I had a dollar for every time I heard a well-meaning designer use the word “experience” as a euphemism for “Flash microsite,” I would have the down payment for that new MINI by now.

In the context of design, experience should mean the same thing as it means in reality, which is not tied to any platform or mechanism. It is simply a series of perceptions and interactions; independent of channel. Not only should the experiences we design consider all human aspects of the interaction itself, they should work within the context of the user’s life. This is where strategic disciplines can inform the approach of the UX designer. In essence, it doesn’t matter how perfect the articulation of the interaction, or how elegantly the experience is structured; if it does not address a human need or desire, it is destined to decompose in the ever-more-crowded graveyard of traditional advertising (RIP).

Now that I have that out of my system, I’ll share the definition of UX that I’ve come to embrace.

UX Definition

Experience Design is exceptionally well positioned to address the problems we face in the Era of the Fox. I would love to hear other perspectives… Please add, subtract, concur, rebel, or submit below.

View all Posts
See more in: , , , , , ,
  • http://runmotherfuckerrun.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/ux/ UX « Run, Motherfucker, run

    [...] meu ídolo. « Um pouco de lucidez nunca [...]

  • http://twitter.com/markpwagner Mark Wagner

    Jason,

    That’s a good definition, especially for a topic difficult to define. I was just speaking the other day about how astonishing that the anthropology/ethnography angle of UX seems late coming to the conversation. We’ve been so overwhelmed with technology that fascinates us that it seems a human perspective has been forgotten…until recent years.

    As I think about it now, I angle it a little differently. I gravitate toward ‘experience design’, because that’s what it seems like we’re evolving to as a profession. It also gets away from that lukewarm regard for the ‘user’ label (I still think the human aspect has to be reflected in the definition, though). I’d also probably lose the qualifier ‘media agnostic’ since the definition seems like it should be more encompassing.

    You’ve inspired me to ask myself: Is it an approach? A profession? A discipline? A practice? A method? A process? I think it needs to be something that suggests activity or movement, which prevents it from staying in the theoretical realm:

    ‘Experience design is the cross-disciplinary practice of administering generative activities and outcomes that help answer the needs, wants and desires of people in specific contexts over time.’

    While ‘generative activities and outcomes’ is a little vague, I’m not sure how much more specific the definition for those items should be.

    Was this a worthy stab?

  • http://zeusjones.com/blog adrianho

    Not sure if you saw this but Jeff from Design for service wants to keep service design and UX separate – he’s not buying the holistic viewpoint: http://designforservice.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/foreswearing-ux/

  • http://twitter.com/markpwagner Mark Wagner

    Jason,

    That’s a good definition, especially for a topic difficult to define. I was just speaking the other day about how astonishing that the anthropology/ethnography angle of UX seems late coming to the conversation. We’ve been so overwhelmed with technology that fascinates us that it seems a human perspective has been forgotten…until recent years.

    As I think about it now, I angle it a little differently. I gravitate toward ‘experience design’, because that’s what it seems like we’re evolving to as a profession. It also gets away from that lukewarm regard for the ‘user’ label (I still think the human aspect has to be reflected in the definition, though). I’d also probably lose the qualifier ‘media agnostic’ since the definition seems like it should be more encompassing.

    You’ve inspired me to ask myself: Is it an approach? A profession? A discipline? A practice? A method? A process? I think it needs to be something that suggests activity or movement, which prevents it from staying in the theoretical realm:

    'Experience design is the cross-disciplinary practice of administering generative activities and outcomes that help answer the needs, wants and desires of people in specific contexts over time.'

    While ‘generative activities and outcomes’ is a little vague, I’m not sure how much more specific the definition for those items should be.

    Was this a worthy stab?

  • http://zeusjones.com/blog adrianho

    Not sure if you saw this but Jeff from Design for service wants to keep service design and UX separate – he's not buying the holistic viewpoint: http://designforservice.wordpress.com/2009/04/2…

  • http://pjbfcp.com/ pjbfcp

    Great post! It’s refreshing to see a reexamination of the definition of UX instead of just discussing its place in the process of software design. I might add that the experiences we design should not only work within the context of the user’s life but, in the context of the moment. UX was easier to define ten years ago when we created brochure-ware for the Interwebs. Now we have to deal in moments and know that users may experience our creations on a phone while dancing in a night club or on a coffee table in a bar. The experiences have changed but so have the moments.

  • pjbfcp

    Great post! It's refreshing to see a reexamination of the definition of UX instead of just discussing its place in the process of software design. I might add that the experiences we design should not only work within the context of the user's life but, in the context of the moment. UX was easier to define ten years ago when we created brochure-ware for the Interwebs. Now we have to deal in moments and know that users may experience our creations on a phone while dancing in a night club or on a coffee table in a bar. The experiences have changed but so have the moments.

  • Guest

    You’ve just defined design.

    There’s really no need for the ‘UX’, ‘User Experience’, or ‘Experience’ appendages.

  • http://designforservice.wordpress.com/ Jeff

    I’d love for UX to be able to reclaim the holistic mantle. But I feel like the “Flash microsite” perception is more common. That’s one reason why I try to keep UX at arm’s length when discussing service design.

    For what it’s worth I also distinguish between UX design (in the software sense) and experience design (in the immersive, hedonistic, multi-sensory Pine and Gilmore sense). In my book UX Design and Experience Design aren’t interchangable. It’s a recognition of the massive qualitative difference between Twitter and Disneyland.

  • Adam

    You've just defined design.

    There's really no need for the 'UX', 'User Experience', or 'Experience' appendages.

  • http://designforservice.wordpress.com/ Jeff

    I'd love for UX to be able to reclaim the holistic mantle. But I feel like the “Flash microsite” perception is more common. That's one reason why I try to keep UX at arm's length when discussing service design.

    For what it's worth I also distinguish between UX design (in the software sense) and experience design (in the immersive, hedonistic, multi-sensory Pine and Gilmore sense). In my book UX Design and Experience Design aren't interchangable. It's a recognition of the massive qualitative difference between Twitter and Disneyland.

  • http://jasonsack.com jasonsack

    Hi Mark, I agree about the “user” term, and there has been plenty of discussion about whether that term itself is correct. I think that any definition of experience design as something that takes into primary consideration the value of the experience in real lives is a good one.

  • http://jasonsack.com jasonsack

    Thanks for the comments. I’ve definitely heard that argument before. I feel that the ubiquity of network media demands some distinction of these definitions. There is a difference between crafting a message that gets pushed out to a “target audience” and creating an experience that a person interacts with. Since the broad use of the term has traditionally described the former, I prefer to distinguish.

    It is of course true that many designers are excellent experience designers, but it is perfectly plausible to have a brilliant graphic designer who is completely in the dark when it comes to interaction. And Interaction Design was another term popular for some time, a label which I am also comfortable with, but seems a bit too associated with the Web, rightly or wrongly, to be meaningful for an environment which is much more complex.

  • http://jasonsack.com jasonsack

    Good point. That’s how I think of the distinction as well, and it really depends on the context or project. But either way I try to think holistically – so many insights are hidden just beyond the reach of any given discipline. In some ways Bruce Sterling was on to something when he called Experience Design “the most imperialistic” of all design forms. An irony which is not lost on me.

  • jasonsack

    Hi Mark, I agree about the “user” term, and there has been plenty of discussion about whether that term itself is correct. I think that any definition of experience design as something that takes into primary consideration the value of the experience in real lives is a good one.

  • http://jasonsack.com jasonsack

    Thanks for the comments. I've definitely heard that argument before. I feel that the ubiquity of network media demands some distinction of these definitions. There is a difference between crafting a message that gets pushed out to a “target audience” and creating an experience that a person interacts with. Since the broad use of the term has traditionally described the former, I prefer to distinguish.

    It is of course true that many designers are excellent experience designers, but it is perfectly plausible to have a brilliant graphic designer who is completely in the dark when it comes to interaction. And Interaction Design was another term popular for some time, a label which I am also comfortable with, but seems a bit too associated with the Web, rightly or wrongly, to be meaningful for an environment which is much more complex.

  • http://jasonsack.com jasonsack

    Good point. That's how I think of the distinction as well, and it really depends on the context or project. But either way I try to think holistically – so many insights are hidden just beyond the reach of any given discipline. In some ways Bruce Sterling was on to something when he called Experience Design “the most imperialistic” of all design forms. An irony which is not lost on me.

  • http://www.support1000.com/ Computer Help

    An informative post….and i agreed your definition. Thanks for sharing with us.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Top Tags

Archive

Recent Comments