Introducing usability roles in public authorities

ABSTRACT

One of the most common ways of introducing usability into development work in a public authority is by employing a usability professional. But how successful is this strategy when it comes to increasing focus on usability in the organization and how successful have these usability professionals been in introducing usability activities into the development work in their organizations?

This paper is based on five case studies on the introduction of usability professionals in public authorities in Sweden. These different ways of introducing usability are discussed and analyzed. Based on this data we draw conclusions about what to consider in order to achieve a successful introduction of usability. Interviews with nine usability professionals were conducted all of which were recorded, analyzed and condensed into the case studies presented. One lesson learned from the case studies is the importance of a formal title as it shapes interpretations of what usability is about. Another issue discussed is the usefulness of a formal job description, and personal characteristics of the person working with usability. Based on the case studies we draw the conclusion that a senior usability professional is to be preferred since introduction of usability often implies organizational change as well as conflicts and discussions at a management level. Another conclusion that can be drawn from the studies is that usability work is more successful in the short perspective if it contributes directly to the design and program code instead of focusing on strategic levels such as policy, evaluation of existing systems and method development.

REFERENCES

• 1: Mitchell Kapor, A software design manifesto, Bringing design to software, ACM, New York, NY, 1996 [doi>10.1145/229868.230026]
• 2: Gould, J. D., Boies, S. J., Ukelson, J., 1997. How to design usable systems. In: Helander, M., Prabhu, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier., Amsterdam, pp. 231--254. Second revision.
• 3: Katzeff, C., & Sväärd, P. O., 1996. In search of key factors for usability maturity. Proc. of HCI '96.
• 4: Thyra Rauch , Tom Wilson, UPA and CHI surveys on usability processes, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, v.27 n.3, p.23-25, July 1995 [doi>10.1145/221296.221303]
• 5: ISO/TR 18529, 2000. Ergonomics of Human--system Interaction---Human-centred Lifecycle Process Description. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 6: Göransson and Sandbäck, 1999. Usability designers improve the user-centred design process. In: Brewser, S., Cawsey, A., Cockton, G. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction --- INTERACT '99, vol. II. Edinburg press, Edinburg.
• 7: Inger Boivie , Jan Gulliksen , Bengt Göransson, The lonesome cowboy: A study of the usability designer role in systems development, Interacting with Computers, v.18 n.4, p.601-634, July, 2006 [doi>10.1016/j.intcom.2005.10.003]
• 8: Gulliksen, J., Göransson, B., Boivie, I., Persson, J., Blomkvist, S. & Cajander, ÅÅ. (2003) Key principles for user-centered systems design. Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol. 22, No. 6. pp. 397--409, Taylor & Francis.
• 9: Göransson, B., Gulliksen, J. & Boivie, I. (2003). The usability design process --- integrating user-centered systems design in the software development process. Software Process Improvement and Practice, Volume 8, Number 2. pp. 111--131. Wiley.
• 10: Jan Gulliksen , Inger Boivie , Jenny Persson , Anders Hektor , Lena Herulf, Making a difference: a survey of the usability profession in Sweden, Proceedings of the third Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction, p.207-215, October 23-27, 2004, Tampere, Finland [doi>10.1145/1028014.1028046]
• 11: Jan Gulliksen , Inger Boivie , Bengt Göransson, Usability professionals-current practices and future development, Interacting with Computers, v.18 n.4, p.568-600, July, 2006 [doi>10.1016/j.intcom.2005.10.005]
• 12: Hardenborg, Niklas (2007). Designing Work and IT Systems: A Participatory Process that Supports Usability and Sustainability. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology, ISSN 1651-6214; 376. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-8344 (2008-04-20)
• 13: Cajander, Å., Boivie, I., Gulliksen, J. (2006) Usability and User's Health Issues in Systems Development - Attitudes and Perspectives. In E. Law, E. Hvannberg, G. Cockton (eds.) Maturing Usability; Quality in Software, Interaction and Value. Springer Verlag.
• 14: Cajander, Å., Eriksson, E., & Gulliksen, J. (2007) Evaluating Procurement, Usability and Off-the-Shelf Office Software. In E. Law, M. K. Láárusdóttir, & M. Nøørgaard (eds.) COST294-MAUSE Workshop - Downstream Utility: The Good, the Bad, and the Utterly Useless Usability Evaluation Feedback. Institute of Research in Informatics of Toulouse (IRIT) Toulouse, France, 2007, pp. 25--29
• 15: Nielsen, J., 2003. Return on Investment for Usability, Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, January 7.
• 16: David A. Siegel , Susan Dray, Living on the edges: user-centered design and the dynamics of specialization in organizations, interactions, v.10 n.5, September + October 2003 [doi>10.1145/889692.889703]
• 17: Alan Cooper , Paul Saffo, The Inmates Are Running the Asylum, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., Indianapolis, IN, 1999
• 18: McCoy, T., (2002). Usability: Who Cares? In Usability Gaining a Competitive Edge. IFIP World Computer Congress 2002. Hammond, J., Gross, T., Wesson, J. (Eds). Pp 283--294. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

General Terms:
Human Factors, Management

Keywords:
case study, public authority, usability expert, usability professional