I like to think of software as a person in a service conversation with the user. The user would be a teenage girl ordering concert tickets or a hung over dad figuring out how to turn on his phone. But the software would always be a professional.

Even better, the software acts and makes decisions as if it were among the world’s best in what it is doing. Why shouldn’t it? As interaction designers, we spend hours preparing for a simple five minute conversation.
One way to apply this could be imagining a conversation between this, the software persona, and a user.

Like users get personas, the application should have one, too

If the software persona is a business professional, try a five-star hotel concierge. If he is so smooth in his service, so polite in his behavior and so smart in his mind, what would he say when the user forgets their password or tries to buy 120 Harry Potter books?

- I’ll take 120 copies
- I must inform you that you are buying 120 copies of the same title, sir. Most of our customers buy just one. Are you sure?

Most web 2.0 software personas seem to be surfers in part time jobs, and that’s fine, because most people love relaxed Californians (or at least people from California do).

- I’ll take 120 copies
- Dude, that’s a lot of books! It’ll take you years to finish them, and you’ll know the ending, man. Are you really really sure?

Both software personas seem credible and like someone you’d trust to help you.

- I’ll take 120 copies
- No.

Not very polite, but could work. Consider this one:

- I’ll take 120 copies
- Okay. Your order will be processed like any other order placed on the web. An RFC 822 compliant email will be sent to you shortly. Our fulfilment team will then immediately begin your order. Please be aware that your order contains one or more items or a count of the same item that will delay your order.

(Talking of ”are you sure”, how many times do you hear that question in the supermarket, when removing stuff from your cart?)

(photo: Kecko on Flickr)

Finding inspiration in call center agents

It might be an interesting exercise trying to imagine your software as an 800 customer service number (as long as you pick one known for its high level of service)

As I mentioned in the previous post, I was on a call center software project, and a part of the research we had in our back pockets showed that these call center agents were true experts.

Service as an instinct

They knew several 300-page catalogs by heart. They knew what color went with what pair of what kind of clothes. When testing our design, we found that they did this without paying attention to it. They serviced the faux caller – being the test facilitator – as efficient as they would any other customer. They even tried to upsell him. My guess is that they didn’t know how not to.

Then why should our software? How would these extremely routined and professional agents handle your users after 10 years of experience and quarterly performance reviews?

I just found this list of names for a call center application project I was on last year.

• Miranda Newsom
• Joanna Fredricksburg
• Himalaya Paulsson
• Nicolette Noyles
• Tony Hanna

In that period, I had a 1 hour commute. I would be on the train listening to Joanna Newsom’s latest album while reading a short story by Miranda July (in the book with the cool website). However, by accident the protagonist of the wireframe became a fictional person with the name Joanna Newsom, just like the harp-playing singer. Apparently, my colleagues and the customer did not know who that was, and the name spread to other wireframes not done by me.

Now, two months ago, on another project, another continent and another designer, I see that name again. Along with the name of the designer’s cat (took me a while to figure out why they would giggle when I described befriending scenarios with Master Lux).

I have no clue as to how the other names on the list above emerged. There might not be any. The last one is a bit unrealistic, though.

In Imity, we all loved Pelse Hanoi, also quite unrealistic, but lovable, obviously (Pelse’s tags reveal some of our fantasies of his or her metier, which are lovable, too).

For mockups and wireframes I prefer to dream up fictional names myself rather than having them generated. In times of low creativity, why not consult the the list of the 100 best characters in fiction, the list of people who have been claimed to exist, or maybe list of fictional characters sorted by IQ.

Det er hundetasken.

Her er slides fra min præsentation på ITU i sidste uge, hvor jeg talte længe og næsten uden pause om at lave mashups, og hvad jeg kom ud for mens jeg gjorde det.

De understregede ord i præsentationen kan klikkes på, og vil lede dig direkte til det omtalte mashup. Den fulde liste er også her.