Challis Hodge’s UXblog

Peter Merholz writes an interesting piece over on Peterme.com about lab-based usability testing. Knowing Peter as I do I find it hard to believe that he meant to write yhis as I perceived it.

Case in point: I recently finished a project where we were going to develop a product to help people remember the important dates and events in their lives. A fairly standard process would have involved prototyping of this product, and then bringing people in to “test” the prototype. What we did, however, was field research. We went into 12 homes, and saw how people currently managed their stuff. And, believe me, it’s messy and complex. One participant used: a church address book, a week-at-a-glance, a Palm-style PDA, a simple address-storing-PDA, and an Access database to manage this task. Had we brought her in to test our prototype, we could have found out all kinds of stuff about how she used this prototype in isolation and away from her tools. But we would have learned nothing about how this tool could possibly have integrated itself into his complex web.

What peter seems to be suggesting is that lab-based usability testing and field-based user research are one in the same.

In my view, we need to be in the field (in the context of use) in the early stages of problem solving. We need to understand the user in context. As we begin to formulate solutions we need to put them back in front of the user to help uis identify our successes and failures. It is precisely at this point that usability testing comes into play. Perhaps this is where Peter is suggesting we get out of the labs and into the context of work/life? If so, I think he might be on to something.

The problem described here is not unlike that which confronts scientists and doctors working to develop vaccines or medical cures. Obviously they can’t head straight out to the public making injections and observing the consequences–even though this might be the fastest path to a solution or cure. Nor can they afford to hole up in a lab iterating over years to ultimately arrive at a solution with minimal risk along the way. Their challenge is to find balance between time and safety. They must start with research, followed by lab testing, and trials on humans ultimately reaching public release in a safe and timely manner.