Mis-selling of design as UX is the problem
I keep meeting people who say they do UX but don’t, they are designers and there is nothing wrong with taking a design approach to digital, process or product development projects. The problem comes in the mis-selling of design as UX, as the results are dramatically different.
If a client does not want to pay for UX they get Design
Paying for UX means paying for research, insights, testing and customer requirements. It’s survival of the fittest, some companies should fail in any case it’s normal. If you pay peanuts… and some client companies think you can get platinum by paying for cement. That’s not what the market is for, it’s to offer wider choice, not cheaper brilliance.
If a client does not want user/customer research and insights they get design
- UX creates user research, design absorbs research by others
- UX tests the requirements, design tests the product
- UX applies usability standards for the target audience, design applies industry standards
- UX has mediators between the client and customer, design tells the client to trust them
- UX invents based upon the user research, design follows the crowd
- UX established new paradigms, design enforces existing paradigms
- UX has servants, design has divas
The right skill for the right client
There is a place for Design where the client is weak and does not know what they want to achieve, designers will tell them what to do.
Where clients have clear ideas, UX refines these ideas through customer research to establish a projects requirements and reveals any quirks or new opportunities of the target customers.
I hope this helps business people to recognise what they are paying for and get a return on investment