AN INDUSTRY IN DENIAL, SUCCESS CRITERIA IN THE NEW ECONOMY

<< DEFINITION OF HCI, REASONS OF NON-BRIGHT ASPECTS, SOFTWARE APARTHEID

GOALS & EVOLUTION OF HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION >>

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

Lecture

Lecture 3. Introduction

Human-

Computer Interaction Part III

Learning Goals

As the aim of this lecture is to introduce you the study of Human Computer

Interaction, so that after studying this you will be able to:

Discuss the effect of bad tools

Discuss and argue about why Human computer Interaction (HCI) is important

with reference to the way in which technology has developed during past forty

years

Describe requirement of new economy era.

Effect of Bad Tools

Not only are computers taking over the cockpit of jet airliners, they are taking over

the passenger cabin, too, behaving in that same obstinate, perverse way that is so easy

to recognize and so hard to use. Modern jet planes have in-flight entertainment (IFE)

systems that deliver movies and music to airline passengers. These IFEs are merely

computers connected with local area network, just like in your office. Advanced IFE

systems are generally installed only on larger airplanes flying transoceanic routes.

One airline's IFE was so frustrating for the flight attendants to use that many of them

were bidding to fly shorter, local routes to avoid having to learn and use the difficult

systems. This is remarkable considering that the time-honored airline route-bidding

process is based on seniority, and that those same long-distance routes have always

been considered the most desirable plums because of their lengthy layovers in exotic

locales like Singapore or Paris. For flight attendants to bid for unglamorous,

unromantic yo-yo flights from Denver-to-Dallas or LA-to-San Francisco just to avoid

the IFE indicated a serious morale problem. Any airline that inflicted bad tools on its

most prized employee--the ones who spent the most time with the customer---was

making a foolish decision and was profligately discarding money, customer loyalty,

and staff loyalty.

The computer-IFE of another large airline was even worse. The airline had created an

in-flight entertainment system that linked movie delivery with the cash collection

function. In a sealed et airplane flying at 37,000 feet, cash collection procedures had

typically been quite laissez-faire; after all, nobody was going to sneak out the back

door. Flight attendants delivered goods and services when it was convenient and

collected cash in only a very loosely coupled fashion. This kept them from running

unnecessarily up and down the narrow aisles. Sure there were occasional errors, but

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

never more than a few dollars were involved, and the system was quite human and

forgiving; everyone was happy and the work was not oppressive.

With cash-collection connected to content delivery by computer, the flight attendant

had to first get the cash from the passenger, then walk all the way to the head-end of

the cabin, where the attendant's console was, enter an attendant password, then

perform a cash register-like transaction. Only when that transaction was completed

could the passenger actually view a movie or listen to music. This inane product

design forced the flight attendants to walk up and down those narrow aisles hundreds

of extra times during a typical trip. Out of sheer frustration, the flight attendants

would trip the circuit breaker on the in-flight entertainment system at the beginning of

each long flight, shortly after departure. They would then blandly announce to the

passengers that, sorry, the system was broken and there would be no movie on this

flight.

The airline had spent millions of dollars constructing a system so obnoxious that its

users deliberately turned it off to avoid interacting with it. The thousands of bored

passengers were merely innocent victims. And this happened on long, overseas trips

typically packed with much-sought-after frequent flyers. I cannot put a dollar figure

On the expense this caused the airline, but I can say with conviction that it was

catastrophically expensive.

The software inside the IFEs worked with flawless precision, but was a resounding

failure because it misbehaved with its human keepers.

3.1 An Industry in Denial

We are a world awash in high-tech tools. Computers dominate the workplace and our

homes, and vehicles are filling up with silicon-powered gadgets. All of these

computerized devices are wildly sophisticated and powerful, but every one of them is

dauntingly difficult and confusing to use.

The high-tech industry is in denial of a simple fact that every person with a cell phone

or a word processor can clearly see: our computerized tools are hard to use. The

technologists who create software and high-tech gadgets are satisfied with their

efforts. The software engineers who create them have tried as hard as they can to

make them easy to use and they have made some minor progress. They believe that

their products are as easy to use as it is technically possible to make them. As

engineers, their belief is in technology, and they have faith that only some new

technology, like voice recognition or artificial intelligence, will improve the user's

experience.

Ironically, the thing that will likely make the least improvement in the ease of use of

software-based products is new technology. There is little difference technically

between a complicated, confusing program and a simple, fun, and powerful product.

The problem is one of culture, training, and attitude of the people who make them,

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

more than it is one of chips and programming languages. We are deficient in our

development process, not in out development tools.

The high-tech industry has inadvertently put programmers and engineers in charge, so

their hard-to-use engineering culture dominates. Despite appearances, business

executives are simply not the ones in control of the high-tech industry. It is the

engineers who are running the show. In our rush to accept the many benefits of the

silicon chip, we have abdicated our responsibilities. We have let the inmates run the

asylum.

When the inmates run the asylum, it is hard for them to see clearly the nature of the

problems that bedevil them. When you look in the mirror, it is all too easy to single

out your best features and overlook the warts. When the creators of software-based

products examine their handiwork, they see how rich the product is in features and

functions. They ignore how excruciatingly difficult it is to use, how many mind-

numbing hours it takes to learn, or how it diminishes and degrades the people who

must use it in their everyday lives.

3.2 Techno-Rage

An article in a recent issue of the Wall Street Journal described an anonymous video

clip circulated widely by email that showed as "...Mustachioed Everyman in a short

sleeved shirt hunched over a computer terminal, looking puzzled. Suddenly, he strikes

the side of his monitor in frustration. As a curious co-worker peers over his cubicle,

the man slams the keyboard into the monitor, knocking it to the floor. Rising from his

chair, he goes after the fallen monitor with a final ferocious kick." The article went on

to say that reaction to the clip had been "intense" and that it had apparently tapped

into a powerful undercurrent of techno-rage".

It's ironic that one needs to be moderately computer savvy to even send or view this

video clip. While the man in the video may well be an actor, he touches a widespread,

sympathetic chord in out business world. The frustration that difficult and unpleasant

software-based products are bringing to our lives is rising rapidly.

Joke email circulates on private lists about "Computer Tourette's." This is a play on

the disorder known as Tourette's syndrome, where some sufferers engage in

uncontrollable bouts of swearing. The joke is that you can walk down the halls of

most modern office buildings and hear otherwise-normal people sitting in front of

their monitors, jaws clenched, swearing repeatedly in a rictus of tense fury. Who

knows what triggered such an outburst: a misplaced file, an inaccessible image, or a

frustrating interaction. Or maybe the program just blandly erased the user's only copy

of a 500-page manuscripts because he responded with a "Yes" to a confirmation

dialog box, assuming that it had asked him if he wanted to "save your changes?"

when it actually asked him if he wanted to "discard your work?"

Novatech survey

One in every four computers has been physically attacked by its owner, according to a

survey.

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

The survey, conducted by British PC manufacturer Novatech, was intended to take a

lighthearted look at embarrassing experiences -- those little technical bloopers that

happen even to ubergeeks, like forwarding a personal love letter to an entire office

mailing list.

But instead, a much darker story emerged in the 4,200 replies. Innocent computers are

being beaten on a regular basis, often by technically challenged users who decide to

take their frustrations out on their helpless machines.

"We decided to do some research into people's relationships with their computers and

we were amazed by some of the results," Novatech managing director David Furby

said. "As computers become more and more a part of our daily lives, we obviously

share more experiences with them."

Many technical support people from the United States, Canada and parts of Europe

have sobering stories of brutalized computers being brought in for repair by sad -- or

in some cases, smug -- owners who had smacked, kicked or otherwise deliberately

injured their machines.

"The incidences of willful neglect have always been high," said David Tepper, owner

of the Village Computer Shop in New York. "We've always had to deal with

computers damaged by people who dumped their refreshing beverage on the

computer's keyboard, or got tangled up in the cords and bringing (sic) the computer

crashing down off their desk."

"But there have also always been a small - but significant - number of machines

that were obviously intentionally damaged."

"Hopefully as technology improves and computers become ever more user- friendly,

these attacks will become less frequent," Furby said.

Computer rage

There is a technology-based scourge afoot...maybe. It's not a virus; it's not a denial

of service attack; it's computer rage, and according to the latest reports, it is out to

destroy the physical health, the emotional stability, and if left unchallenged, the

economic strength of whatever population it strikes.

Security software vendor Symantec, working with Britain's National Opinion Poll,

recently found that when confronted with technical problems, more than 40 percent of

British users surveyed have sworn at, kicked, or otherwise abused their computers,

monitors, and the most victimized of all computer components, their keyboards.

In similar surveys conducted last year, Marlborough, Mass-based Concord

Communications discovered that 83 percent of 150 U.S. respondents witnessed such

attacks, and the international market research firm Mori found that 40 percent of 1250

British workers had watched as their colleagues leveled verbal and physical abuse at

their computers.

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

Stress related to computer rage, the Symantec study claims, has resulted in a loss of

productivity for most respondents.

Robert Edelmann, clinical psychologist and author of Interpersonal Conflicts at Work,

is worried. "Frustration with IT should be taken seriously as a modern malaise," he

says. "It is affecting both our work and our home lives to the extent that computer

rage is now much more prolific than road rage."

Computers increasingly commonplace in offices

As the reliance on computers in the workplace continues to grow, people in the UK

are resorting to violence when their PCs break down, say researchers. When faced

with technical problems, most people shouted at colleagues, hit the PC or even threw

parts of the computers. The most frustrating hitch was when people lost their work

after their computer crashed or froze.

The problems seem to be widespread with more than a quarter of those working with

computers experience problems with their PC on a weekly basis.

"Over half of all working days lost to sickness in the UK are related to workplace

stress," said Fiona Dennis, a stress management trainer with Priory Healthcare.

"Being heavily reliant on IT to speed up our lives means that performance is

hampered greatly when it fails, causing an over-reaction and stress."

70% swear at PCs

The study by the National Opinion Poll and the software company Symantec, found

that nearly half of all computer users had become angry at some time. Almost a third

of people had physically attacked a computer, 67% experienced frustration,

exasperation and anger and more than 70% swore at their machines.

Technology rage is the latest rage to emerge in Britain and follows road rage, trolley

rage and air rage. There was a dramatic rise in air rage incidents last year, with 174

people detained at Heathrow and Gatwick alone. In 1998 the number of air rage

arrests for the whole country was 98.

3.3 Success Criteria in the New Economy

The successful professional for the twenty-first century is either a business savvy

technologist or a technology-savvy businessperson.

The technology-savvy businessperson knows that his success is dependent on the

quality of the information available to him and the sophistication with which he uses

it. The business-savvy technologist, on the other hand, is an entrepreneurial engineer

or scientist trained for technology, but possessing a knee business sense and an

awareness of the power of information. Both of these new archetypes are coming to

dominate contemporary business.

You can divide all businesspeople into two categories: those who will master high

technology and those who will soon be going out of business. No longer can

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

executive delegate information processing to specialists. Business is information

processing. You differentiate yourself today with the quality of your information-

handling systems, not your manufacturing systems. If you manufacture anything,

chances are it has a microchip in it. If you offer a service, odds are that offer it with

computerized tools. Attempting to identify businesses that depend on high technology

is as futile as trying to identify businesses that depend on the telephone. The high-tech

revolution has invaded every business, and digital information is the beating heart of

your workday.

It has been said, "to err is human; to really screw up, you need a computer."

Inefficient mechanical systems can waste couple cents on every widget you build, but

you can lose your entire company to bad information processes. The leverage that

software-based products---and the engineers that build them---have on your company

is enormous.

Sadly, our digital tools are extremely hard to learn, use, and understand, and they

often cause us to fall short of our goals. This wastes money, time, and opportunity. As

a business-savvy technologist/ technology-savvy businessperson, you produce

software-based products or consume them---probably both. Having better, easier-to-

learn, easier-to-use high-tech products is in your personal and professional best

interest. Better products don't take longer to create, nor do they cost more to build.

The irony is that they don't have to be difficult, but are so only because our process

for making them is old-fashioned and needs fixing. Only long-standing traditions

rooted in misconceptions keep us from having better products in today.

Consider a scenario: a website is developed of ecommerce system. The site is

aesthetically very beautiful, technically it has no flaw and it has wonderful animated

content on it. But if user is unable to find its desired information about the products or

even he is unable to find the product out of thousands of products, so what of it's use.

It is useless from the business point of view.

Here are some facts and figures:

Users can only find information 42% of the time

Jared Spool

62% of web shoppers give up looking for the item they want to buy online

Zona Research

50% of the potential sales from a site are lost because people cannot find the item they

are looking for

Forrester Research

40% of the users who do not return to a site do so because their first visit resulted in a

negative experience

Forrester Research

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

80% of software lifecycle costs occur after the product is released, in the maintenance

phase - of that work, 80 % is due to unmet or unforeseen user requirements; only 20

% is due to bugs or reliability problems.

- IEEE Software

Around 63% of software projects exceed their cost estimates. The top four reasons for

this are:

Frequent requests for changes from users

Overlooked tasks

Users' lack of understanding of their own requirements

Insufficient user-analyst communication and understanding

- Communications of the ACM

BOO.com, a $204m startup fails

BBC News

Poor commercial web sites will kill 80% of Fortune 500 companies within a decade

- Jakob Nielsen

So all above given facts reveals that the product with the bad user experience deserve

to die!

The serious financial implications of today's digital products should not in any ways

be underestimated.

The table given below depicts two scenarios of potential of sales from an e-commerce

web site. In scenario A, users can easily find items they are looking for, so 0% sales

are lost, so the actual revenue is $100 million. In scenario B, users cannot easily find

the items they are looking for, therefore, the actual revenue is $50 million, thus

causing a loss of $50 million.

Scenario A

Scenario B

Revenue Potential

$100m

User Experience

Good

Bad

Sales Lost

50%

Revenue Lost

$0m

$50m

Actual Revenue

$100m

$50m

Human Computer Interaction (CS408)

3.4 Computer + Information

What do you get when you cross a computer with information?

In 2000, the Olympic Games were held in Sydney. Before the Olympic games could

begin, a lawsuit was filed against the Olympic Committee. The case was called Bruce

Lindsay Maguire vs Sydney Organizing Committee for the Olympics Games

(SOCOG). On 7 June 1999 the complainant, who is blind, complained to the

Commission that he was unlawfully discriminated against by the respondent in three

respects:

the failure to provide Braille copies of the information required to place orders

for Olympic Games tickets;

the failure to provide Braille copies of the Olympic Games souvenir

programmed; and

The failure to provide a web site which was accessible to the complainant.

It was alleged that the SOCOG was in breach the Disability Discrimination Act 1992

by failing to make accessible to him key parts of its web site

According to the law of many European and western countries, organizations with a

web site must ensure that their web site is (within certain limits) accessible by

disabled persons. However, this was not the case in the matter of the official Olympic

Games web site. Could this have been avoided? Certainly: by applying a few very

simple techniques, the developers of the web site could have made it accessible to

people with vision-impairment. But as is usually the case, this was not done.

Result: the complainant won the case and was awarded a sum of money in damages.

This was very embarrassing for both the SOCOG and also the company that

developed the web site.

References

http://www.independentliving.org/docs5/sydney-olympics-blind-accessibility-

decision.html

2. http://comment.cio.com/soundoff/061400.html

Table of Contents: