It has become almost a clich\u00e9 to recall that Steve Jobs was totally against market research and never needed to do any.\u00a0 His quotes on the subject have turned into a view widely held by many that no consumer research is necessary.<\/p>\n
In fact, Jobs’ observations were about not asking customers what they want<\/em> because they don\u2019t know until you show it to them.\u00a0 And this is the nub of the issue.\u00a0 Good research is about asking the right questions of the right people in the right way to understand their behaviours, attitudes, habits, values, norms, beliefs and routines.\u00a0 In other words, to understand their lives and what makes them tick to identify their frustrations, pain-points and un-met needs.<\/p>\n Consider the recent launches of very expensive, full-frame, mirrorless cameras by both Canon and Nikon that featured just one card slot.\u00a0 This caused both consternation from those who feel two card slots are a minimum requirement in case of card failure (especially at the price points concerned) and ridicule of that consternation by others insisting they have never had a card fail and therefore it never happens\u2026to anyone.<\/p>\n This argument in the photographic community has blown up into a huge issue with its own momentum.\u00a0 There has even been a meme of someone taping two film canisters to the outside of a film camera trying to imply it was not a problem in the days of film.\u00a0 Well, it was, which was why in the days of film pros always used multiple film camera bodies at events, in case of problems.<\/p>\n Interestingly, differing perspectives on the slots issue seems to be driven by the modern phenomenon of the \u2018fanboi\u2019 or \u2018fangirl\u2019; the allegiance-driven psychology of defending the ecosystem that\u2019s been bought in to (often literally) and dismissing any objective analysis or counter position that might conflict with the fan\u2019s subjective stance. \u00a0Some companies, in some industries, may depend on such unyielding loyalty to ameliorate shortcomings in their products and services, but it is likely to lead to a long-term decline in fortunes.<\/p>\n So, what could UX research have done to eliminate such user frustrations and pain-points?\u00a0 Fundamentally, it comes down to posing the right questions of the right people in the right way.<\/p>\n Who ultimately decided that one card slot was \u201cgood enough\u201d and how was their decision informed?\u00a0 How deeply were users engaged in the design process?\u00a0 Critically, what iterative testing processes and prototyping was undertaken and with whom?<\/p>\n Was the research unbiased or was designed to lead to a pre-determined result or, worse still, designed to validate a position already taken? Or was any research undertaken at all during product development?\u00a0 Too often research stops at the un-met need.\u00a0 Good user research takes the opportunities derived from insights and prototypes and tests, tests and tests again\u2026with users.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a myth that Apple doesn\u2019t do research.\u00a0 It does and always has.\u00a0 It succeeds by focussing on understanding the user in the round, where they suffer frustrations, inconveniences, pain-points in their lives and uses these insights to create and inform opportunities that could appeal to archetypal users exploiting new products and services that are tested and improved through iterative evaluation and prototyping.<\/p>\n Research is not a bolt-on extra, it needs to be integral to the design process.\u00a0 Well-designed research delivers well-designed products and services.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" It has become almost a clich\u00e9 to recall that Steve Jobs was totally against market research and never needed to do any.\u00a0 His quotes on the subject have turned into a view widely held by many that no consumer research is necessary. In fact, Jobs’ observations were about not asking customers what they want because … Continue reading Apple Does Research Too…<\/span>