Experiences are Emotional:体验是情感的


As Experience Design broadens to take on the challenge of delivering experiences that are clearly related and consistent regardless of context or channel – the aim of customer experience initiatives in many large organizations – we run the risk of failing in our attempts if we persist in adopting terminology relevant only to a single context, and focused only on a small portion of the experience itself.

当体验设计的范畴在不断延展的时候,也正是其面临着一种设计挑战的时候,即体验设计师希望给用户传递一种可独立于情境或频道、具有相关性(延续性)和一致性(稳定性)的设计。

As Experience Designers we are running the risk of failing in our attempts to enable experiences that are clearly related and consistent regardless of context or channel. Our persistent use of terminology relevant only to a single context, and focused only on a small portion of the experience itself, hampers the efforts of customer experience initiatives in many large organizations.

当体验设计的范畴在不断延展的时候,也正是其面临着一种设计挑战的时候,即体验设计师希望给用户传递一种可独立于情境或频道、具有相关性(延续性)和一致性(稳定性)的设计——如同在许多大型组织内部客户体验部门的目标——此时,如果我们依然坚持采用只和单一情境相关的术语语境来讨论该体验,并且只是集中在这个体验本身的一小部分的话,很有可能让我们所做的各种尝试(希望体验稳定且一致)最终失败,这也会限制许多大型机构组织内客户体验部门作出的努力后所得到的效果。

To design experiences that are consistent across different contexts and environments we need to focus on the qualities of the experience that do not change, rather than the means through which we enable that experience.

设计一种在各种不同情境和环境下一致的体验,我们需要关注于这个体验中的那些保持不变的性质,而不是我们为了得到这种体验所采用的方法。

体验是一种混合的产物,这种混合包含了我们所采取的行为,我们通过不同的感官所得到的感受,以及我们对前两者所作出的反馈,于情感层面。

Experiences are a combination of the actions we take; what we perceive through our various senses; and our emotional response to both.

Form constrains形式的限制

Actions are constrained by the physical or technological environment within which the experience takes place. A person’s behaviour, and context, are inexorably tied to this environment. The form of an object or space both implies and constrains its use. The availability and type of controls; the physical or virtual dimensions; the presence or absence of pathways; all contribute to, and constrain, the range of available actions.

行为会被体验发生地点的物理环境或科技环境所限制,一个物体或一个空间的形式都能够暗示和限制它本身的使用范围。控制的种类和它的有效性,维度是物理抑或虚拟,路径的存在与否,这所有的东西既提供了也限制了允许采取有效行为的范围。

Similarly, the range of senses we can stimulate is also limited by the environment. Digital environments lack smell and touch, producing a greater reliance on thought, sight and sound. Physical environments provide different perceptual constraints, allowing for the use of aromas, for example, to enhance the experience. At the same time, the presence of these additional stimulants also acts to dull the influence of all sensual influences.

类似地,环境也限制了我们能够被激起的感受的范围。数字环境下缺乏嗅觉和触觉的存在,却对心智思考、视觉和听觉有更大的依赖。物理环境虽会有不同的感知限制,但亦可通过,比方说允许利用氛围(Aroma正常翻译作灵氛),来提升某种体验。同时,这些附加的感知刺激物的存在也钝化了(不能)被全感观支配的影响。

Our focus, then, falls to the emotional response participants have when undertaking these activities, and perceiving through their senses. It is the emotional response that provides a consistent design intent across environments, touchpoints, interactions.

因此,我们的关注点放在了当参与者进行这些活动、并通过他们的感官去感受的时候,这些参与者所产生的情感层面的反应。恰是这些情感化的反应提供了在不同环境、不同接触点、和不同互动方式下的一致的体验设计目的。

Articulate design intent清楚表达我们的设计目的

We need to articulate our design intent using the language of emotion so that the same resultant experience can be delivered across the various environments within which customers might interact; working within the constraints of action and perception imposed by each environment.

我们需要使用情感的语言来清楚表达我们的设计目的,使同样结果的体验能够被不同的互动环境所传递出来;并且,我们还要学会在各个不同环境里,在行为和感知的限制条件下传递出同样的体验信息。

The transition from usability and HCI-type practices to one of user experience has been represented by a shift in focus from the functional characteristics of a system or interface, to a focus on the slightly more abstract qualities of those functions when executed in a certain way.

从基于可用性或HCI框架类型下的实践,向用户体验的转化的表现,可从一个系统的界面对其功能特性所反应出的关注,向按照某种特定方式执行这些功能时候所表现的更为抽象的品质的关注,展现出来。

We need to articulate our design intent using the language of emotion

我们需要通过使用情感层面的语言,清楚表达我们的设计目的

This can be seen in a lesser reliance on measures such as task-completion and time-to-complete, and the increased use of descriptors like ‘ease of use’ of a system, or whether a system is ‘intuitive’ to use. These are qualities of the functional implementation. And whilst these contribute to the emotional response a user may have when interacting with the system, they can be seen merely as descriptors of the qualities of the actions undertaken within one very specific type of environment; and then only at the plane of interaction between user and system. Descriptions of perceptual attributes within this UX tradition are similarly narrow. Talk of “speed” and “performance” provide some level of broader application – to, say, the efficiency of a service – but focus solely on one type of perception – namely the passage of time.

这一点可以从许多时候我们减少采用如“完成任务”或者“完成所需的时间”等衡量方法,而增加对系统的“易用性”的描述或者系统是否能够让用户凭借“直觉”使用的描述。这些正是功能执行时所表现的更为抽象的品质所在。同时,即时这些品质能够被归结于用户与系统交互时发生的情感化的回馈,它们也只不过可以被看作是一种用于描述(用户)在一个非常特定的环境下所进行的活动的品质的方式,况且这只是发生在用户与系统所构成的交互平面上。归结于此,用户体验传统下的感知描述也是类此般的狭窄。谈论“速度”和“表现”提供了一些更广的应用-如对于服务的有效性-但这些都只是全然集中在一种感知方式-即,流逝的时间(这个维度上)。

Emotive qualities情感层面的性质

UX designers with a more visual bent, coming from a graphic design or visual communications tradition, (typically) speak more to the emotive qualities of a visual language or aesthetic. And it is here that we really begin to see an appropriate descriptive focus for the resultant experience, albeit within the realm of the visual domain.

那些来自于平面设计或者传统视觉传达的、更有视觉设计倾向的用户体验师,(典型地)更注重运用视觉语言或美学意义于表现情感品质。而正是在此,我们开始能够以一种恰当的描述方式来关注那些体验,尽管是在视觉的范围内。

The process of arriving at an emotive description often works in reverse, however, with the designer choosing an emotive language to describe a particular visual exploration or aesthetic, rather than receiving a direction in experiential or emotional terms to begin. Where that direction is given, such as through the guise of brand values or personality, the description is of the organization – not the emotional response of the customer or user.

但是,这种产生一个(体验的)情感性描述的过程是一个逆向的过程,设计师们选择一种情感化语言(为结果)去描述一个特定的视觉化过程,这个过程针对于探究或审美,而不是开始于从经验或情感所获得一个指引。但即使给出指引,例如通过品牌价值或品牌个性等名词的伪装下,这个描述也仅是对于该组织的描述-而非顾客或用户的情感化回馈。

Such descriptions tend to fall short in two, significant ways:
这种描述很有可能在下面两个重要的方面上显出其不足:

  • the perspective and focus of brands is, by definition, around the personality of the organisation; and;
    这种品牌的视角和品牌的重点,就本身而言,是围绕着该机构组织的个性;并且;
  • this emotional perspective is kept distinct from the work of designing the activity and perceptual qualities of the system/service.
    这种情感化的视角把自身区分与一些设计工作 ,即活动的设计和感知层面上系统或服务的品质的设计。

Whether we look to the qualities of actions undertaken as described in usability/HCI circles of the UX field; the narrow perceptual lens of time; the broader perceptual lens of aesthetic; or the language of brand personality, we fail to articulate the qualities of an experience we may wish to reproduce in a consistent manner across environments.

不管我们如何看待进行中的活动在用户体验领域中可用性/HCI圈子里的品质,不管是时间的窄感知视角,还是审美的更为宽泛感知视觉;或者是品牌个性的语言,我们都没能够清楚表达一种体验的特质,一种我们所希望在不同的环境下能够再生产有着稳定形态的体验。

Mac App Store

An articulation of the emotional qualities of our intended experience is, therefore, essential when we take on the more holistic challenge of designing systems or end-to-end service experiences. For example, when aiming to deliver an online experience consistent to one delivered in-store – such as with Nespresso; or when extending a product line into a product-service system – such as the introduction of the new Mac App Store.

所以,清楚表达我们目标体验的情感性质,对于我们在进行整体设计系统或端到端服务体验的时候,是非常重要的。比方说,针对于传递与在实体店内一致的在线体验,如Nespresso,或延展一个产品线成为一种产品-服务系统,如新的Mac App Store的推出。

Coming back to the example of the phrase ‘ease-of-use’, let’s explore why such descriptors are insufficient as a means of articulating the experience intended. Something is easy-to-use when the actions possible within the context of the system are clear, well-ordered, work as expected, and do not require complex or complicated input sequences in order to achieve some desired end.

回到‘易用性’这个术语的例子上,让我们来探究一下为什么这样的描述的方式对于清楚表达目标体验来说,是不充分的。有些东西是容易使用的条件是:当该系统所在情境的一切可能动作是发生在一个清晰、好秩序、如预想般运作,并且不会为了要得到一些期望结果而要求一些复杂难懂的序列输入。

Express our intent表达我们的目的

However, our desire for such ease-of-use – from the perspective of experience design – is not an end in and of itself. Our aim might be, for example, to instill our user with a sense of confidence, capability, or willingness to act. Perhaps our aim is simply to avoid frustration and maintain a sense of calm.

但是,我们对于这样易用性的渴望——从体验设计的角度来说——并不是其自身的终点。比方说,我们的目标可能是灌输给我们的用户一种自信、有能力、或是有意愿去行动的感觉。或者我们的目标只是简单地防止用户感觉沮丧,并保持一种平静地感觉。

When we express our intent in these terms, we’re much better equipped to execute across different contexts and environments and achieve the same experience. “Easy to use” might be a useful descriptor for a digital interface, but it is inappropriate, and therefore largely meaningless, when designing, say, a retail presence or the logistics capability for an online purchase. Much better to employ ‘willingness to act’ as the desired experiential characteristic.

当通过这些术语去传达我们的目的时,我们实现了在不同的情境和环境下,有更好的方法去得到相同的体验。“容易去使用”可能对数字化界面来说是一个有用的描述,但对于设计例如一个在线购物的连锁店实体或物流能力的时候,这样的表述是不恰当的,也因此而很大程度上没有意义的。此时,如果采用“有行动的意愿”这样的表述作为期望体验的特性的话会更好。

To what extent are organisations attempting to craft the type of consistent, multi-context experience for which these emotional descriptions are needed?

到什么程度时,组织机构会需要这些情感的描述来尝试传达在多种情境下稳定的体验?

Similarly, we find ourselves woefully ill-equipped to make decisions about other experiential elements that become relevant in different context. For example, how should our retail environment’s lighting be designed? What aromas or smells might be appropriate?

类似地,我们可悲地发现当在其他体验元素在不同的情境下需要产生关联时,我们往往没有太好的方法给我们作出任何决定的帮助。比方说,我们的连锁店里的环境灯光应该如何设计?什么样的氛围和味道是恰当的?

Vice versa, if scents or lighting are being used in a physical environment – such as the signature smell of some hotel chains – do we simply ignore them when designing a customer’s interaction with a call centre? Or is there an emotional intent behind the use of a particular scent which can be translated into a contact-less environment like a call centre?

反之亦然,如果在物理环境中采用了味觉或灯光——例如在一些连锁酒店中标志性的味道——我们会不会简单地忽视它们,当需要设计客户与呼叫中心的交互时候?或者说某种特定的味道的使用背后有没有一个特定的情感层面的目的,能够被转化为在设计无须和用户直接接触的环境(如呼叫中心)的时候所考虑的因素?

Is this really a concern, however? To what extent are organisations attempting to craft the type of consistent, multi-context experience for which these emotional descriptions are needed?

但是,这真的会是我们关心的因素吗? 到什么程度时,组织机构会需要这些情感的描述来尝试传达在多种情境下稳定的体验?

Modern practice in architecture, systems, interaction and service design all require the type of multi-context consistency described above. Corporations and Government agencies in Europe, North America, Australia and Asia are actively pursuing projects designed to introduce ‘customer’ experiences designed around an holistic, unified set of characteristics – and mostly failing to achieve the level of consistency desired or needed.

在建筑设计、系统设计、交互设计和服务设计中的现代实践都要求如上述般一种跨情境体验的稳定性。在欧洲、北美、澳洲和亚洲的公司组织和政府机构均主动地寻求引入一种顾客体验项目,它围绕一种全面、整体、且统一的性质——但在绝大多数时候都没能成功得到所希望或需要的稳定一致性。

Let us ensure alignment让我们确保一个基准

We can better ensure alignment across contexts and environments if our objective is described in terms more suitable for such application. Once we begin to think of experiences as experiences, rather than actions or perceptions, we become much better able to critique each specific incarnation of that experience in whatever context it might occur.

如果我们目标的描述对于这些应用来说是更有效的,我们就可以更好的确保不同情境和环境下的基准点 。只要我们开始把体验用属于其自身的方式来思考,而不是用别的像动作或者感知的方式,我们将变得能够更好的评判体验的每一种特定形态,不论它可能产生于何种情境当中。

We cannot ignore the actions customers will want or need to carry out; nor should we. Similarly we should not ignore the characteristics of customers’ perception. However, it is the emotional qualities of the experience that provide us with the means to translate the full range of experiential qualities of one system or service component to another, thereby delivering on the promise of experience design.

我们不能忽视顾客们希望或需要执行的行为动作;我们也不应该忽视。同样地,我们也不能忽视顾客感知的特性。但是,正是我们所感受的体验的情感品质,把一个系统或服务部分的情感品质完全传达到另一个系统或服务上,这其中也传递出体验设计的希望。

Advertisements

发表评论

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 更改 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 更改 )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 更改 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 更改 )

Connecting to %s

%d 博主赞过: