I read an article recently in the Capital Monitor on Peugeot in which the author tells the story of Peugeot's entry into the U.S. automobile market. Peugeot hired J.D. Power to conduct a study on customer satisfaction. What they found out was that Americans thought Peugeot cars had trouble starting.
What Peugeot engineers knew, however, is that it wasn't a problem with the technology. It was a problem with user behavior. American drivers at that time were used to pumping the gas prior to starting a car. And Peugeot's advanced fuel injection system would get flooded if you pumped the gas prior to starting.
The interesting part of the story is what happens next. What would you do if it were your technology project? Attempt to educate the user population on the correct way to use it? Or re-design the system to fit user expectations? Peugeot chose the former approach. I'll give you a hint on how that worked out. They no longer sell in the U.S. market.
One thing we've known for years is that if the User Interface fails, the application fails. Technology needs to be easy to use. It should be self-apparent. When Apple introduced the iPhone, they said "you already know how to use it." That was one of its best features and key to its success. And, by the way, security needs to be built-in and invisible. You have to adapt the system to user expectations.
Understanding system user behavior is critical to its success and adoption rate. We take two lessons from the Peugeot story. First, design with user behavior in mind. And second, if there's a design flaw, don't be afraid to do some re-engineering. You can't expect any sizable population to all-at-once drop old habits. And usability is as important as any back-end wizardry that uses all the latest buzzwords.
No comments:
Post a Comment