Why End Users in the Humanitarian Community Just Suck
Only joking, all you end users out there! But Philanthropy 2173 puts it perfectly:
Have you ever wondered why everyone – grandmas, kids, CEOs – can figure out how to use Amazon, eBay, Google but the otherwise-intelligent staff of nonprofit organizations often need extensive support from the companies or associations that provide them with grants management, CRM, web-conferencing and other software?
Why yes, I have! It seems incredible that some of the smartest people I’ve ever met just don’t have the time to invest in learning how to use software properly, but that’s how it is. It doesn’t help that most software looks as if it was designed by a colourblind mountain gorilla with a severe font disorder, and that’s exactly what a group of NGOs in Bangkok noticed:
As the session leader noted, “its because the commercial properties invested in interface once, and don’t have to provide support afterwards.” Amazon et al depend on their FAQs and online databases to answer your questions. Actually, they depend on their interface being useful enough that you don’t have any questions. And it tends to work.
Which means that unless we can design software that has a sufficiently intuitive interface – i.e. it looks like other software or services that you’ve used before – we’re going to keep running into the same old problem. Better design, that’s a good start (I live in hope), and web-based services that can be updated from a central point without everybody having to upgrade their software are also a good start.
The most important thing, though, is something that my old martial arts teacher used to tell me: FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION. Software needs to match user expectations, fit in with their existing ways of working, if it’s going to work out.
People are able to adapt to new technology, no doubt – email is a good example, a mode of communication that simply didn’t exist before and consequently had to establish new patterns – but it’s incredibly difficult to “enforce” that adaptation in the NGO community.
Full post at Philanthropy 2173: Investing in interface. Hat tip to David Geilhufe.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Interesting article, standards as we all know are critical to ensure effective sharing of information.. standardising formats for GUI’s is all part of the same holy grail. Commercial organisations focus clearly on customer needs and the customer experience, to make it easy, informative and as helpful as possible. Keeping the FUNCTION focused enables the FORM to be intuitive!
David Saunders
21 Nov 06 at 21:37
Having said that, a lot of commercial offerings are by no means user-friendly – they just seem that way because we’re used to them. E-mail clients are a good example – Outlook is a nightmare to navigate if you’re coming to it new, even the terminology isn’t easy to understand. We need a general crusade for usability, particularly for users who didn’t grow up with computers, which obviously includes a large (albeit shrinking) proportion of the world’s population.
Paul Currion
22 Nov 06 at 17:53
It’s taken years for people to figure out how to design usable software, and considering how far behind the humanitarian/non-profit sector is in IT … is there any hope?
One additional problem in the humanitarian sector is that the developer can be very removed from the actual users, eg. Software developer in the USA writing programs for staff in Africa.
I’ve had the fortune to sit next to people, as I train them to use the software I’ve developed for them. It becomes quickly apparent where something is confusing, or could be simplified. I usually walk away with at least a couple of notes on things I can improve!
Its even better when the users come up with suggestions for ways to improve the software. It shows that they’ve really engaged with it, and understand what it can do. Although it does mean more work for me
Michael
26 Nov 06 at 11:06
It definitely works out better when you’re sitting with the end users. As you point out of course, “real” software developers realised this a while ago – unfortunately it’s a lot more difficult to do in our context because of distance/costs/etc.
It doesn’t always work, of course. I sat in the WFP offices and warehouse in Banda Aceh for a couple of weeks, designing an inventory management database, then placed somebody in the compound to follow up on support and implementation. It still didn’t take.
Paul Currion
27 Nov 06 at 9:54
I believe that it is an iterative process. You spend time with the users, you develop a spec, you check the spec with the users, you develop a prototype, you check the prototype with the users, you modify the prototype. It is a feedback process which gradually refines the software to usability.
Sure, I was able to do this rather easily, because I was in the field, but I’m sure you could easily find software developers to quit their day jobs and come and work in the field. (Wild unsupported statement – any support with this argument would be appreciated!)
Michael Howden
27 Nov 06 at 12:47
Iterative development – preferably agile development – is definitely the best approach to take in this sector. We need to develop an agile methodology that fits our constraints – distance, cost and capacity being the critical three, I guess – that makes it possible.
I’m sure we could find some software developers ready to quit their day jobs and work in the field. I’m not sure that’s the best approach, though – it’s exactly the same model that’s failed in other development sectors. I’d prefer a community of practice that everybody can benefit from at both HQ, regional and national levels; a more open attitude from NGOs to share their tools with peers for open review; and more collaboration to converge critical business processes at HQ level.
But I would say that….
Paul Currion
27 Nov 06 at 13:29
I’ve just been to a workshop on “Participatory Development”, and it got me thinking about Participatory Software Development. I’ll have to muster my thoughts together and put something on my blog about it.
I would definitely agree on more collaboration between HQs, and networking between software developers throughout the humanitarian sector, but I wouldn’t underestimate the value of having developers out in the field. Ultimately we should be building capacity in the countries we work. It isn’t too hard to find someone who can code, but to find someone who can design good software…
Michael Howden
12 Dec 06 at 21:15