Users Are All Different Complicating the issue of understanding the end- user perspective is the fact that there is never a single, monolithic end user. End users possess differing levels of expertise, patience, and dedication. Some will spend most of their day inputting and inquiring directly into the system. Others will be intermittent users.
Also, some systems cross corporate boundaries, involving either suppliers or customers. Therefore, the range of expertise extends from experts to intermittent users, and includes individuals directly under the control of the organization and others who are not. Some of the latter users can often be the most important to
business success. If its systems are too difficult to use, a company may face the loss of valued customers.
The requirement to understand the end-user perspective in all its complexity is a strong argument for embedding systems analysts within end-user organizations, where they can get to know and identify more closely with the end users. It is also an argument for using a prototyping approach to systems design whenever possible to obtain user feedback as often as possible. Highly structured applications (i.e., transaction processing systems) should prototype the user interface. Where applications are less structured (i.e., decision support systems or executive support systems), designers would want to prototype both the user interface and as many aspects of system functionality as possible.
USABILITY LABS
One interesting approach to better understanding the end-user perspective was developed by an insurance company that set up a usability lab. Although the company emphasizes a user-centric design approach, it wanted to do more to ensure system acceptance and use by the end-user community. Thus, after systems are developed, the lab is used to test the applications for usability with typical users prior to system release.
The various classes of users are identified and scheduled for lab sessions. The lab is equipped with movie projectors to record body language and facial expressions as well as to time the various operations. The videotapes are carefully reviewed by those responsible for the eventual system rollout to learn what they can about difficulties and training issues. If the lab experience indicates that changes are required, they are made and the results tested again.
Multiple Data Interfaces
An interesting offshoot of the usability lab is the concept of providing more than one user interface to an application. Historically, systems designers have focused on a single interface to be used by all users regardless of their positions within the company, their degree of computer literacy, or their frequency of use. One size does not fit all, however.
Although it is generally true that 80 percent of the usage is accomplished by 20
percent of the users, the intermittent users may be quite significant to the overall success of the application. Also, intermittent users may be very influential within their organizations.
A simple example is the experience a well-positioned professor had when trying to use the college library’
s new search tool. The professor needed only one book, for
which he knew the name and author. However, he still had to:
1. Log onto the school network
2. Get to the school home page
3. Click on the library navigator
4. Click on the library catalog
5. Click on local library
6. Click on search the catalog
7. Type in the title of the book
8. Click on search
9. Click on view
The professor was frustrated by the amount of time it took him, as a seasoned user, to access the information he needed. He suggested that IS place an icon on every faculty and student desktop that gets them to step 6 or 7 in one click, or the setup of a few stations in the library that are set to stay on step 6 or 7.
The system that was developed was suitable for first-time users, but not for frequent users. Having multiple interfaces can prove a valuable feature for many systems, particularly when the user base is heterogeneous.
DEVELOPING TRAINING AND SUPPORT ROGRAMS
Whether or not systems are designed to fit the end user, training and support programs can be an effective way to create a fit between a new system and its users.
When developing training and support programs, it is important to consider the relative advantage, complexity, and compatibility of the system. Other factors that should be considered include the type of user (intermittent versus power user), the user’
s cognitive style, and the user’
s position in the organization.
Marketing a New System to the User
When implementing a system that does not provide direct advantage to the end user, but is important to the larger organization, a well-orchestrated training program can be one way to market the new system.
For exa mple, a consumer products organization recently implemented a sales force automation system that greatly reduced the lead time to move orders on the books to the factory. When implementing the system, they found it was difficult to get the sales representatives to attend scheduled training classes. Given their compensation plans, salespeople preferred to spend time with customers, not in classes. The IS
organization discovered that the most effective way to reach the sales force was to attend its regularly scheduled sales meeting. Training for the new applications was delivered in one to two hour modules during the sales meeting.
Training Users with Fewer Technical Skills
There are several effective ways to implement an application that exceeds the technical sophistication of end users. First, a training program could be developed that upgrades the skills of the end users, concentrating on the shortcomings between their existing skills and those required by the application. As a second option, a more technically sophisticated employee who is specifically seeking out those skills required by the new system might be hired. A third option, which has been
successful in a number of companies, has been to develop user teams consisting of one or more sophisticated users and one or more less-experienced people.
Improving the Fit of New Applications
In cases where the new application is not particularly compatible with other applications that end users employ or activities that they routinely conduct, consideration must be given to redesign of the other applications and activities to improve fit. Where this is not possible, an aggressive training program, possibly linked to the evaluation and incentive program, would be useful.
USER DIFFERENCES
Beyond targeting a training program at addressing areas where the fit between the application and potential end users is poor, designers must also realize that people learn in different ways, and that no one generic training program is likely to succeed with the total population. Users may differ because of the frequency with which they interact with the application. Users of the same systems may also represent different levels of authority in the organization.
User Intelligences
One school of thought says that people have different types of “intelligences,” with different parts of the brain controlling different abilities. For example, some people learn better from pictures than from words. Thus, the most effective training program would take into consideration the different learning approaches of the end-user population.
The theory of multiple intelligences, developed by Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner, is recognized by corporate America and is being used by companies, including General Motors, Saturn Corp., and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Gardner suggested there are seven intelligences — linguistic, musical, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal.
Gardner’
s work can be used to develop computer-learning techniques. Individuals with high logical- mathematical or musical intelligence do best with programmed instruction; those with high linguistic intelligence do best with written documentation; those with high spatial intelligence prefer to start with the big picture and a fast overview; and those with bodily kinesthetic intelligence prefer a hands-on, do-it-yourself, trial-and-error approach. Although this is an oversimplification and it is apparent that most people have more than one kind of intelligence, it should be obvious that, to be as effective as possible, a training program will take into consideration the preferred learning styles of the end users.
Motivating Users to Learn
Another factor in developing an educational program is timing. The frenetic wall-to-wall meeting style and activity load in businesses today make it difficult to pique the interest of people if there is not a pressing reason for learning. Thus, it is important to schedule the training when there is motivation for learning, for example, when the
new system will be rolled out. The just-in-time element is a needed motivator to capture the attention of those involved.
The use of inside versus outside trainers depends on the in-house capabilities. If available, insiders who are familiar with the company and its culture can probably do the job better. However, it may be better to go outside than to stretch the capabilities of the inside staff.
Designing Content
Content is a vital factor in the effectiveness of training. For the most part, a discussion aimed at the basic level of how to interact with a new system should begin with and include a description of the total system — why it was designed and implemented, the major objectives, the connection with other systems, and overriding elements of the system.