Designing for Unexpected Uses

Dan Saffer just posted a great entry about designing for unexpected uses, which is something I’ve been giving a lot of thought to. We use things all the time in ways they were never originally intended. A designer will invariably end up marveling at how people actually use her creations, which I think is one of the joys of design.

Too often I feel like the industry is going in the other direction and believing that good design means anticipating every need and precisely planning all user interactions. It’s important to research, prototype, and test usability — but don’t forget about flexibility. One aspect of human centered design is that humans like to customize and play. In fact, maybe we can learn the most by looking at games.

I’m not suggesting that picking phones numbers from our address books should be like playing a first person shooter or that changing a radio station should involve answering trivia questions. But I’m interested in the way that games tend to give their users options, sometimes allowing them to create entirely new worlds while maintaining a consistent and recognizable experience throughout.

Even if something is designed for creative use a person may need some prodding to start customizing it. Building in examples might not be enough. I’m reminded of when I look at interactive art in a gallery. Even when the sign ensures me I should play with the work I’m nervous about touching it. A user needs to feel comfortable using the product in manner different than the default they associate it with.

Thinking about this, I’m reminded of what a new and inexperienced field interaction design is. I’m sure this sort of discussion has been around for ages and I’m excited to learn more about what’s already been discovered. I think the fields of architecture and museum design might be the best places to start looking for examples.

View Comments (4)

# July 27, 2004 09:00 PM

Comments

i read an article (perhaps in game developer magazine?) about this game that was being dsigned and the crazy stuff that playtesters figured out that the pogrammers never anticipated. for example, one player married a CPU-controlled player, then killed her father, which then meant that they inherited a whole bunch of gold. stuff like that rally is fascinating. related to games, you should read stuff here: http://culturalgutter.com/ Our good old buddy jim munroe strikes again.

Posted by: jim on August 1, 2004 2:49 AM

There are something that are created that are done so to serve one primary purpose, say a coffee pot, but there are people that make tea with coffee pots. A coffee grinder is obviously good for a lot more things than grinding coffee (spices, nuts, etc), but it is still primarily used for grinding. (And I think in this discussion we are talking about interesting uses for things…not using your coffee grinder to prop open your window). Tools are a great example of something in which flexibility of use is not just excouraged, but expected. Tools that hold only a single purpose do not last long in most toolboxes. The flat head screwdriver is probably one of the single most versitile tools I can think of. In nearly every service manual ever written there is a step that says “Pry open with a screw driver.” Nobody stops to think that maybe they should go get a small prying tool instead (if that even exists) because a screwdriver works great. I think the most fexible and customizable things are those that are the simplest because the fewer the added options, the more inherant options their are.

Posted by: caleb on August 16, 2004 1:50 PM

I thought you’d be interested in this article on unintended uses of condoms distributed by the Indian government: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/08/13/1092340459567.html?oneclick=true.

Posted by: Andrea on August 16, 2004 3:13 PM

*Caleb*: I think you’re right. The best tools, especially hand tools, are those that serve multiple purposes. Tools like that have been refined over centuries to their bare essence. Just by holding them you can see how they can be used. I think that’s one of the essential challenges and shortcomings of _digital_ design — creating something that’s intuitive and evolved without the benefit of physicality. *Andrea*: Thanks for that article; what a crazy situation. It not only speaks to the unbound usefulness of latex but shows how inventive people can be when the materials are free.

Posted by: Simon King on August 17, 2004 10:57 AM

As Far As I Can Tell

Designing for Unexpected Uses

Comments

Micro Updates