Here's a totally unthought through idea.....but thought I'd write it down for later..
I have frequently used my inbox as a pseudo task manager, emailing myself reminders of tasks to do. Why? Well, the inbox is something I know I will keep returning to and also entering a new task (i.e. sending a new mail to myself) is quick, because i have now automated the shortcuts in my mind. However, there has always been the stress of filling up my inbox with tons of messages, that aren't 'real' messages but just reminders to myself. And yet, it did seem to work...I found having things in the 'tasks' section of Outlook or the 'Calendar' section sort of makes them invisible and thus easy to forget. Out of sight, out of mind...
I can think of many benefits of having all information in one view - a stream of useful information and tasks - and maybe all that is needed is a better way to organise it. How about if we created an application that had a single stream of information ( a bit like twitter), into which you'd put emails (or be sent emails), tasks, status updates, files, anything you please (could you keep your traditional different apps, but let them 'feed' into this single information stream. We could then build in powerful filter/view tools to constantly alter that view...filter by type, by tag, by date, by priority, by project, by type (calendar meeting vs task) anything. One view with powerful view tools and only one place to focus your attention...one place where you knew everything important is and will jump to your attention when needed. This would be a great concept to experiment with and would build on the usability concept of allowing learners to focus and 'get in the zone' - you never have to think where to look...there is only one place to look. Make this stream available to others to input to and it becomes even more interesting.
I wonder if this is what Google Wave is like...don't know, haven't used it yet!
Thursday 24 June 2010
Reduce the load on short term memory
When I switched from Windows to Mac, I had to change from Outlook to Entourage. One feature I really miss is the ability to drag an email onto the Calendar, making an instant appointment with the details in the message. Entourage makes me remember the date of the meeting in the email, go to the Calendar, open a new appointment and then change the settings - a big load on my poor old short term memory (and completely unnecessary). This made me think of all of the other times I have to rely on my short term memory when doing things on the computer, when right in front of me I have a fantastic device for storing and presenting information and reducing this cognitive burden. It is almost perverse.
For example, take the clipboard that stores data when you copy and paste. Why isn't this system-wide facility more user friendly for multiple items? I.e. why is it not more easy to see what is on the clipboard and make use of it. A simple universal keyboard shortcut could bring up a visual representation of the clipboard showing all available items. Indeed, Microsoft recognised this with the more recent versions of the Office suite, but why not make this a key part of the overall operating system - a nice, universal and visual relief from the burden on short term memory. I'm obviously not the first to recognise this need, given the number of third party apps that now offer this functionality - but something so key should surely be built in by now.
For example, take the clipboard that stores data when you copy and paste. Why isn't this system-wide facility more user friendly for multiple items? I.e. why is it not more easy to see what is on the clipboard and make use of it. A simple universal keyboard shortcut could bring up a visual representation of the clipboard showing all available items. Indeed, Microsoft recognised this with the more recent versions of the Office suite, but why not make this a key part of the overall operating system - a nice, universal and visual relief from the burden on short term memory. I'm obviously not the first to recognise this need, given the number of third party apps that now offer this functionality - but something so key should surely be built in by now.
Context: what file managers can learn from online tools
I've recently been using a number of online project management tools. One feature I really like about them is their ability to mix content/context with individual files and their ability to help you keep track of activity, thus making it visible.
For example, many of these tools allow you to upload a file as part of a comment or message. You get the file AND the message that provides the context for the file (or extra 'must know' information about the file). Even better, other people can then contribute by adding their own comments or replies. They can then upload additional versions of a file (or extra files) and this is logged on the page - right next to the files making this information clear and visible. Even better, you can choose to be notified when files are added or amended, making important changes visible even when your attention is elsewhere.
Another helpful feature is organising the world according to projects and mixing different tools. You can set milestones, have discussions, assign and receive tasks and many other things, all in the same web application.
I see no reason at all why these features should not be available in the standard file managers that come with Mac or Windows. How much more useful they would be if you could start to fill them with useful information (look at all the READ ME files people put in folders as a way to 'fudge' this discussion functionality).
As mentioned earlier, where things are visible and where context and intention is clear, the whole workflow immediately becomes more usable and pleasant.
For example, many of these tools allow you to upload a file as part of a comment or message. You get the file AND the message that provides the context for the file (or extra 'must know' information about the file). Even better, other people can then contribute by adding their own comments or replies. They can then upload additional versions of a file (or extra files) and this is logged on the page - right next to the files making this information clear and visible. Even better, you can choose to be notified when files are added or amended, making important changes visible even when your attention is elsewhere.
Another helpful feature is organising the world according to projects and mixing different tools. You can set milestones, have discussions, assign and receive tasks and many other things, all in the same web application.
I see no reason at all why these features should not be available in the standard file managers that come with Mac or Windows. How much more useful they would be if you could start to fill them with useful information (look at all the READ ME files people put in folders as a way to 'fudge' this discussion functionality).
As mentioned earlier, where things are visible and where context and intention is clear, the whole workflow immediately becomes more usable and pleasant.
Wednesday 16 June 2010
Observation (1)
Usability is not just a set of guidelines or rules. It is also a process; a method for improving things. Combine the guidelines and the process and you've got gold.
Here's the process in a nutshell:
1) Observe the task being performed (it's the first rule of good psychology: watch don't ask)
2) Look for issues
3) Brainstorm solutions
4) Implement
5) Observe task again
6) Iterate....rinse....spit...
Effectively a kind of hypothesis and trial-error blend.
Now, when we are talking the usability of computer systems we usually hope to observe and analyse people using the software we have designed (or a prototype). This then gives us insights into improving our designs and solutions.
When we are looking at improving the usability of our business processes, particularly our own working methods, it can be more difficult.
Let's start with the hard bit: you want to improve the usability of your own work processes. So, the tricky bit is how do you observe this. Well...let's have a think..
1) Self-observation: one method is to try to log the time you take on different activities in a typical day. The problem is this will interrupt your normal working patterns and the act of self-observation is likely to make you work a little differently and may get in the way of insights. Even with these issues, it is still better than no observation at all.
2) Automated observation: there are tools on the market, such as Time Snapper, that can take automatic snapshots and logs of your daily activity that you can then analyse after the fact. Very useful. The only issue is that this only captures your computer time and may miss vital 'offline' activities.
3) Observation by proxy - ask someone else to perform your tasks for a period of time (e.g. a junior or maybe even someone from a different department). Encourage them to think out loud about what they'd do and why. Get them to ask lots of questions. They get some training and insight into your work and you get a reminder that there are probably numerous other ways you could perform your tasks.
4) Self reflective observation - for every task, force yourself to ask 'why am I doing this?' and force yourself to note down the answer. Again, this will try to get you step back from process to the underlying goals.
5) Observation by proxy (2) - can you get the chance to watch an individual who does the same job role as you in another organisation to see how they work and their methods and why they do the things they do.
Whichever method you use, and I'm sure there are many more (or refinements of the above), the goal should be to start to get raw data for the following questions (the analysis stage)
1) What tasks do I typically do? Why?
2) Are these tasks regular tasks or 'one off tasks' - how frequently do they reoccur? How long do they actually take?
3) Which are the high importance tasks and which are the low importance tasks?
4) Which tasks are 'real' work and which are 'excise'? (i.e things that aren't what we actually want to be doing, but are necessary for us to do the tasks we do want to do)?
5) How many interruptions do we get? When? What sort?
6) What are the inputs into the work tasks? What are the outputs? What are the transformations/mappings?
7) How similar are tasks?
8) Which tasks have you self-chosen, which are you forced to do?
9) What are the dependencies between tasks?
10) How much time is spent searching for information to do the tasks?
11) How much time is spent as a result of issues or errors?
12) What tasks have the most room for error? Which are critical?
etc...
The analysis will be the start of your brainstorming for improvements. To help this, there are helpful way to display your answers to the questions...more to come....
Here's the process in a nutshell:
1) Observe the task being performed (it's the first rule of good psychology: watch don't ask)
2) Look for issues
3) Brainstorm solutions
4) Implement
5) Observe task again
6) Iterate....rinse....spit...
Effectively a kind of hypothesis and trial-error blend.
Now, when we are talking the usability of computer systems we usually hope to observe and analyse people using the software we have designed (or a prototype). This then gives us insights into improving our designs and solutions.
When we are looking at improving the usability of our business processes, particularly our own working methods, it can be more difficult.
Let's start with the hard bit: you want to improve the usability of your own work processes. So, the tricky bit is how do you observe this. Well...let's have a think..
1) Self-observation: one method is to try to log the time you take on different activities in a typical day. The problem is this will interrupt your normal working patterns and the act of self-observation is likely to make you work a little differently and may get in the way of insights. Even with these issues, it is still better than no observation at all.
2) Automated observation: there are tools on the market, such as Time Snapper, that can take automatic snapshots and logs of your daily activity that you can then analyse after the fact. Very useful. The only issue is that this only captures your computer time and may miss vital 'offline' activities.
3) Observation by proxy - ask someone else to perform your tasks for a period of time (e.g. a junior or maybe even someone from a different department). Encourage them to think out loud about what they'd do and why. Get them to ask lots of questions. They get some training and insight into your work and you get a reminder that there are probably numerous other ways you could perform your tasks.
4) Self reflective observation - for every task, force yourself to ask 'why am I doing this?' and force yourself to note down the answer. Again, this will try to get you step back from process to the underlying goals.
5) Observation by proxy (2) - can you get the chance to watch an individual who does the same job role as you in another organisation to see how they work and their methods and why they do the things they do.
Whichever method you use, and I'm sure there are many more (or refinements of the above), the goal should be to start to get raw data for the following questions (the analysis stage)
1) What tasks do I typically do? Why?
2) Are these tasks regular tasks or 'one off tasks' - how frequently do they reoccur? How long do they actually take?
3) Which are the high importance tasks and which are the low importance tasks?
4) Which tasks are 'real' work and which are 'excise'? (i.e things that aren't what we actually want to be doing, but are necessary for us to do the tasks we do want to do)?
5) How many interruptions do we get? When? What sort?
6) What are the inputs into the work tasks? What are the outputs? What are the transformations/mappings?
7) How similar are tasks?
8) Which tasks have you self-chosen, which are you forced to do?
9) What are the dependencies between tasks?
10) How much time is spent searching for information to do the tasks?
11) How much time is spent as a result of issues or errors?
12) What tasks have the most room for error? Which are critical?
etc...
The analysis will be the start of your brainstorming for improvements. To help this, there are helpful way to display your answers to the questions...more to come....
Friday 4 June 2010
Make it easy to do the right thing
Perhaps the most noble goal of usable business engineering (tinkering?), is to make it easier for people to do the right thing than the wrong thing. I.e. set things up so when people are distracted, busy, stressed, tired or whatever the environment still tends to funnel them towards helpful actions.
A good, usable system of any sort is tolerant of human error and compensates accordingly. It makes errors difficult. It minimises the impact of error. It sets up 'safety nets' and fail-safe systems and it tries to make productive paths easy and obvious.
A few easy tools to help guide people naturally to the right actions (which I'll expand on in the future):
A good, usable system of any sort is tolerant of human error and compensates accordingly. It makes errors difficult. It minimises the impact of error. It sets up 'safety nets' and fail-safe systems and it tries to make productive paths easy and obvious.
A few easy tools to help guide people naturally to the right actions (which I'll expand on in the future):
- Ready made templates
- Consistent use of tools, procedures and the working environment (physical environment and the 'virtual' environment of the computer)
- In-built guides and supports next to the things being worked on
- checklists
Error-reduction is more difficult. The best starting point is an analysis of job tasks and subsequent identification/analysis of places where error can occur and where it is most costly. You then need to find ways to tackle these error-prone parts of your work process (on an individual, team or organisational level). Some effective error reduction methods are:
- 'lock out' of catastrophic actions (make the errors impossible to make)
- Checkpoints
- Alert and reminder systems
- Monitoring systems
- Make wrong actions difficult , awkward or time consuming
- buffer systems (things that give you time to change your mind; like the delete 'trash' on computers)
For me, any part of the process where people talk about the need for individuals to be 'disciplined' or 'careful' is a clear warning sign that there is an error point that needs more careful consideration.
As usual, more to come...
mapping & visibility: action-based tasks
Task management is difficult. Whatever system you use, getting the right reminder at the right time is a pain. There's been a slow evolution in sophistication, but I can't wait for it to get better and better.
We started with the humble list - at the very least tasks didn't have to reside in our fallible memories.
Then we found ways to let us sort and order and group our tasks (thank you task management software) - making it easier to see the right tasks at the right time - a bit.
Then came reminders, a way to make certain tasks jump up and shout 'notice me' at roughly the right time...and yet, and yet....choosing that time and getting it right still seems so hard to do.
Now, you can have location-based reminders - an important step forward. You get reminded of things when you are in a position to act on them...handy....and yet so many tasks need to be done in anticipation of being in a particular environment.
all together, we are starting to get somewhere: organisation, priority, time and location awareness....getting closer...
Some steps I'd love to see to move us another step along...
1) action-based tasks - there are many work situations where I'd like to be reminded of a task when I'm actually doing something. When I open a document, when I read an email, when i go to a particular folder on the network, etc, etc
2) intelligent tasks - it would be nice to find a way for tasks to have an understanding of their context. The link between tasks, how one relies on another, how they rely on other actions being completed in the overall computing environment, how they become redundant after a time has passed or another task has been completed, and so on...
need to develop this more when have more time....
We started with the humble list - at the very least tasks didn't have to reside in our fallible memories.
Then we found ways to let us sort and order and group our tasks (thank you task management software) - making it easier to see the right tasks at the right time - a bit.
Then came reminders, a way to make certain tasks jump up and shout 'notice me' at roughly the right time...and yet, and yet....choosing that time and getting it right still seems so hard to do.
Now, you can have location-based reminders - an important step forward. You get reminded of things when you are in a position to act on them...handy....and yet so many tasks need to be done in anticipation of being in a particular environment.
all together, we are starting to get somewhere: organisation, priority, time and location awareness....getting closer...
Some steps I'd love to see to move us another step along...
1) action-based tasks - there are many work situations where I'd like to be reminded of a task when I'm actually doing something. When I open a document, when I read an email, when i go to a particular folder on the network, etc, etc
2) intelligent tasks - it would be nice to find a way for tasks to have an understanding of their context. The link between tasks, how one relies on another, how they rely on other actions being completed in the overall computing environment, how they become redundant after a time has passed or another task has been completed, and so on...
need to develop this more when have more time....
You need to use it in its proper way
The starting point for helping us be happier and productive at work has to be an appreciation of who and what we are. When we design our work and work places to complement our strengths and support our 'weaknesses' you'll have happy, productive people. Do the opposite and..........bleh! A workforce of stressed, unhappy, inefficient and unproductive people. Yet our workplaces (and work) so often seem to be designed by evil geniuses bent on thwarting any chance we have at success.
What we are good at:
Creating
Imagining
Sorting
Pattern matching
Communicating (well, most of the time...)
Problem solving
Playing
Dreaming
Tinkering
experimenting
rule devising and testing
Taking action in ambiguous situations
Using 'rules of thumb' to take action in the face of uncertainty
Showing initiative and autonomy
Seeing 'the big picture'
What we haven't evolved so well to do:
Rote, repetitive tasks
Remember non-meaningful material and tasks
Perform frequent, repetitive tasks without error
Work without tiring
Detailed analysis (sure we can do this, but it is effortful and error-prone)
Remember long lists of tasks and information
Task switching and attention-switching (one of the worst features of the modern workplace)
Perform tasks that have no personal meaning - mindlessly following orders (stress, stress, stress!)
Details
So, our goal should be:
Maximise opportunities to take advantages of our strengths (list 1)
Minimise the need to do work that relies on our weak areas
Support people where they do need to do things that we weren't built to do well
There will always be lots of work tasks that unfortunately rely on areas where we are not strong. Fortunately, there are lots of things we can do to make this much more tolerable. A simple example is pen and paper. Our memories for lots of 'meaningless' tasks is poor; but it is OK, we can write tasks down - we can make use of external memory. In fact, we can do much, much better than this. We can make use of a whole raft of job aids and software that take care of low-level processing tasks for us and let us concentrate on the big picture. Do this well enough, and it can almost feel like we aren't having to worry about this stuff at all. Even better, perhaps we can reorganise our work so certain tasks aren't necessary at all - it just takes imagination.
More on this later.
Thursday 3 June 2010
Visibility: just one place
After years of trying different task management approaches, I have settled on one golden rule: keep them all in one place. I don't actually think the system matters that much, or the software; as long as all of your tasks are in one reliable place that you check regularly, you are safe.
Why is this so important? It's back to visibility again. Things can be in plain sight and yet you can still be blind to them. I'm sure we've all got desks with tasks in lots of different locations: some left in your email inbox, some on post-it notes or scraps of paper, some in the 'tasks' section of your email/calendar program and some in your head. All of these locations might be right in front of you, but if you have to divide your attention between multiple locations they can quickly become invisible. They magically slip out of consciousness and might as well not be there at all. At best, you might be reminded of them at the end of the day as you start to close your open programs - but maybe not even then. I find scraps of paper are most vulnerable to this visible but invisible syndrome. If your desk is cluttered with papers, they quickly fall out of conscious attention and they might as well not be there at all.
Also, having your tasks in one location let's you take advantage of another useful human attribute: habit formation. If you constantly check one place, the habit of looking there builds up quickly and make the tasks in that location visible.
This approach is worth considering elsewhere - are there other areas of your work where you divide work products into multiple locations and formats, making them effectively invisible though in plain sight? More on this later me thinks....
Why is this so important? It's back to visibility again. Things can be in plain sight and yet you can still be blind to them. I'm sure we've all got desks with tasks in lots of different locations: some left in your email inbox, some on post-it notes or scraps of paper, some in the 'tasks' section of your email/calendar program and some in your head. All of these locations might be right in front of you, but if you have to divide your attention between multiple locations they can quickly become invisible. They magically slip out of consciousness and might as well not be there at all. At best, you might be reminded of them at the end of the day as you start to close your open programs - but maybe not even then. I find scraps of paper are most vulnerable to this visible but invisible syndrome. If your desk is cluttered with papers, they quickly fall out of conscious attention and they might as well not be there at all.
Also, having your tasks in one location let's you take advantage of another useful human attribute: habit formation. If you constantly check one place, the habit of looking there builds up quickly and make the tasks in that location visible.
This approach is worth considering elsewhere - are there other areas of your work where you divide work products into multiple locations and formats, making them effectively invisible though in plain sight? More on this later me thinks....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)