Instruction: The Introduction Of New UX Strategy In A Large Company

Guidance from the head of the Department of planning and design of interfaces Mail.Ru Group Yuri Vetrov. UX strategy should improve the companys products through changes in the organization that produces these products. Not enough to perform the feat in successful redesign of legacy service — it is necessary to provide repeatability of good results.

Task design leaders to find the path to a brighter future and to lead the company on it. How does a systematic approach to solving problems in General: As you progress there will be more nice things.

To work easier — pokinatcha process problems and increase credibility. The overall level of design in the company will grow — and in terms of basic quality, and in terms of opportunities to do great things in the future. Well, since the appetite comes while eating, and the planning horizon changes in the design will expand and want to move forward even further. Ideally you want to go not just from ideas on fixing that design and business problems — work through them and then to propose a particular implementation and the improvements that will give maximum results.

But in the early stages of organizational changes the problems so much that half of the ideas will certainly go to a business problem and will be mandatory for implementation. And in General at the start you probably need just to survive, proving their worth. When I came in Mail.Ru Group in mid-2011, my colleague Alexey Sergeev has managed to prove to top management the importance of good design. His efforts for a couple of years appeared first on division design team began usability testing, updated several key products.

My task was scaling success with a new team, and Alex went to do grocery strategy. However, the reality was that, although the importance of good design and proven top managers, not all managers are imbued with her. And in General, the middle management level and among the final performers need to build confidence in the designers. I realized it immediately.

On assuming office, I boasted that we will set up a workflow for a month and then everything goes like clockwork. But constantly were some things that demolished intuitive workflows, delayed tasks, broken plans, and so on. In the end the first six months were the most difficult. Expectations on both sides are not all caught in the reality, and there was a feeling that we will soon “ask”.

I watched a lot of failures for design changes in other companies and the first six months is a critical point, after which either all better or all go. On the other hand, during this time, I have realized that it prevents us from inside and outside the team, and described the plan to deal with these pain points. I thought that I would have to defend and prove it, but suddenly it turned out that all, and you just have to act. Since then several years have passed, and we made a mini-revolution in what can be Mail.Ru Group.

First, the pace was not very fast, but as soon as he solved the basic problem, lined up the team and processes, accumulated knowledge and increased credibility of designers, positive changes in the products became more. I regularly take stock of the year, and you can see how the changes took place. Now the team has 14 people, corresponding to approximately 20 products — productivity (“Mail”, “Cloud”, “Calendar”, Mail.Ru for business), media projects (“Auto”, “Horoscopes”, “Children”, “Good”, “Health”, “Lady”, “Movie”, “Mediator”, “real Estate”, “news”, “Answers”, “Weather”, “Sports”, “TV”, Hi-Tech, SEOSan), mobile products (BeepCar, Artisto), home and aldepartment rules Mail.Ru and

Compared to what it was six years ago, its a lot, but if you look at the number of task — load is huge. That is why we are in favour of any methods of automation of the process — design systems, algorithms, avoiding unnecessary work stages and stuff. Constraints driven design idea, and weve learned to work with them.

The new brand is easier to do well without heritage, there is no need to consider old ideas. Of course, not all products are all good, but somewhere the first redesign did not solve all problems, but a huge leap over the years, its hard not to notice. We have developed a design system that is running media projects, mobile web, partial productivity services (and gradually bringing in other products), formed the style of icons and illustrations standartisied of promofilm and promocity.

Yes, there are many services, to which my division and the other teams got hands. But I will get there. Although it would be desirable to break with the past with one final restart, it is not always possible, and very risky — full of stories rash sudden jerks when the redesign has ruined the product and push users. So best to turn the hell in adequate; adequate — to make something modern and trendy; and after that, you can think about how to set trends yourself.

Moreover, in addition to the product updates you want invisible from outside the updating of the organizational structure and production process — it is important to learn how to produce good results regularly on the thread, not every few years when the next redesign. Yes, for a start, changes in design often needs a revolution, but after that it develops in an evolutionary way. The experience of restructuring processes and products formed the basis of a series of articles about UX strategy.

We started the changes in the company at a time when the concept of “product designer” with the broad responsibility has not yet formed, but materials on UX strategy and design management for digital products was a bit. But full of us and other companies bigwigs should make life easier. I have collected a checklist of improvements that will help to initiate or accelerate change in your company.

It is based on our journey and observations of lineages in other companies. The improvements will descend from the problems of business-specific recipes for design managers. Business value → solution method → pattern. Patterns linked to maturity levels (O — operational, T — tactical, strategic).

Business value. Zero stage changes — how to show to business that design is beneficial. Evaluation criteria:

Product: Organization: To convey the fundamentals of good design:

To demonstrate the problem: To show the usefulness of the design in practice:

Business value. To improve the quality of the product to increase its value to users and reduce support costs. Evaluation criteria:

Product: Organization: Quality control-level layouts:

Quality control at the implementation level: Quality control at the product level and the company:

Business value. To accelerate new features and products to market while maintaining acceptable level of quality. Evaluation criteria:

Product: Organization: Reducing the number of iterations:

The predictability of the timing and quality: Business value. To increase the chances of success when launching new products or features of existing ones.

Evaluation criteria: Product:

Organization: Search for product solutions considering diverse requirements: The opportunity to test the product hypothesis at an early stage:

To make the product more valuable and understandable: Business value. To increase product value to existing customers and attract new ones.

Evaluation criteria: Product:

Organization: Grocery insight, coming from designers: Cross-functional interaction:

Predictability: Business value. To increase the loyalty of existing audiences and attract new ones.

Evaluation criteria: Product:

Organization: The unity of the brand: Cross-functional teams:

Business value. To attract and retain a sufficient number of design professionals with the right skills. Evaluation criteria:

Product: Organization:

Closing the current and future needs of the company: Attracting stronger designers: Set of patterns in design management will help to describe the interface and organizational debt, as well as identify a vision for the future of design.

The next task is the evaluation of changes on business value and complexity of implementation. After that, you need to plan the stages of implementation of changes. In the first part of the series I described a “portrait” of the company, it is important to understand the design Manager. Resources, processes and priorities of the three key components that affect the current state of the organization and its future.

This is the environment in which to develop UX, and its features are extremely important for the successful implementation of UX strategy. To implement it, you need to deeply understand the companys business. Most of the organizations has its own characteristics, and although the purpose of the introduction of UX the most similar or the same, the implementation of the strategy is almost always unique in the details.

Resources: Processes: Priorities:

Knowing what are the challenges facing the company at this stage of its development, it is necessary to rank the value of design for business. We take them from the catalog patterns are measured on a scale of “critical — tolerant — it doesnt matter”. This should be done regularly — the company and its products are evolving, and their tasks change. As said Michael porter, the essence of the strategy is to determine what not to do.

Now we need to describe the interface and organizational debt. First show the problems in the product, the second — in the organization that creates this product. To do this work well check-lists and heuristics.

To assess the front-end debt will approach chic pattern from Kimberly Dunwoody and Susan Teague Rector or ready-made checklists like the 10 heuristics of Jakob Nielsen. To evaluate the organizational patterns described above the design management. By the way, my concept of the front-end debt — itself an organizational pattern.

After completing check-lists will be visible problems that will need to decide the design team. We already understood, what are the challenges facing the company now and in the near future, and check sheet clear white spots — what you need to pull up. Now you need to demonstrate a vision for the future of design in the company — what could be the products and organization in a few years when both debt will be significantly reduced. Here work well:

They will help “sell” the difficult implementation of the top management and product team. In addition, there will certainly be something to add to the interface and organizational duty. The list of improvements in the interface and organization, it will surely be impressive, especially in the early levels of maturity.

Here we need to prioritise — what to do in the first place, and that will pay off in the medium and long term. When a company is not yet ready for the method or format of the work, and when something outgrows it. For organizational debt you need to assess every improvement for business value (it is formed in the preceding paragraph) and the complexity of implementing (enough of the efforts of a design team or need help from outside if the external blocking factors). For the front-end debt — impact on key metrics of the product, the number of affected users and complexity of implementation.

The result is a roadmap of the design team. This implementation plan with priorities and with reference to business value in the current and near term. Each pattern provides recommendations for implementation — what it is, why it works, where to start. Ideally, each change should be the criteria of success — as we understand that the organization and products have become better.

The plan change is not as straightforward as it seems from the roadmap. This is often non-food work, which distracts designers from the main tasks, and not all managers are ready for it. In addition, many organizational changes have a delayed effect, so that the time you spent today, your leadership will see the result much later. Will help two techniques:

Many organizational change is multi-faceted and require solutions from multiple heterogeneous tasks to give the desired effect. In order to decompose them to obtain a holistic, not piecemeal effect, they need to be addressed in conjunction. This can be a useful scheduling method for the OKR (Objective Key Results).

We choose three major themes for the quarter (read — complex changes), each of them described in the form of objectives, decisive problem, and metrics showing the success of the deployment. Then make a specific plan of action and go for it during the quarter. This is a good way to focus and mobilize the command to the interface and organizational changes produced visible results, not just the little things improved well-being. An example of OKR.

Predictable high quality design on living foods. Goal. Start quality assurance mechanisms.

Metrics: Key results: Level layouts:

Before rollout: After the rollout:

Well, at the end of each quarter we go back to the first point and updated understanding of the company and its problems in the design. After that we determine the next OKR and undertake their implementation. Every achievement or success of the team and the product is output at best — vacation. But not a Golden parachute or retirement. In the words of Andy grove, “only the paranoid survive” — those who are constantly on the alert.

Medium-and long-term plans is useful to make public. This will help to make understanding of the problems shared in advance to dedicate to their team and management, and ideally to charge them with enthusiasm about what could be the design in the company. We use two tools:

Many companies in the early stages of maturity obvious problems would be through the roof, so you can just take first and deal with them. But a more sensible approach when you have a complete picture will allow us to move faster and better understand the long-term UX strategy. The plan is a good start for the system work.

Even if it is a volume frustered at first glance — as you move the rate of adoption of change will increase and you will be surprised how much effort and motivation is added to the team on the go. In recent years the market of digital products made enormous strides in terms of institutionalizing design. Says Thomas Lockwood, if earlier, the competition was between products with good design and not very good, but now we are getting closer to that basic level of design will be good at all. And forth will break those companies that have built the design on the level of General culture of the company.

In recent years there have been several interesting studies investigating successful in terms of design companies on the market. Although often they reflect the US market, digital products are different from country to country less than in other industries. Researcher Lea Boule held in 2015, Forrester Research for a very interesting study of the market.

She interviewed 23 companies to learn how their design teams. As a result, she turned out to highlight a set of characteristics of the internal organization and involvement in grocery work, which are inherent in the strongest terms design companies. She spoke in detail about the findings at Interaction15, and in 2016 we held a second survey (after leaving Forrester). Here are some of the characteristics of a Mature company:

A similar survey among 360 companies conducted by Nielsen/Norman Group. The results show the challenges of implementing Mature design practices at the company level face design team. There are also many useful insights. For example, the designers get feedback from their small size and where they are in one form or another are included in the design team.

In 2015, being KPCB, John Maeda have released their first report on the state of design in the market of digital products. In 2016, he resigned from the consulting company and now publishes reports on its behalf. They have a lot of interesting facts and figures about why and what is the investment in design makes the business, gradually changing the industry.

Management theory has more than a hundred years of experience, and applied to the design agencies and industrial design for decades, has accumulated considerable expertise. But in the field of digital products is really a vivid history of the introduction of the design at all levels began only in the last decade. There are several model changes that will be useful to examine. Design thinking is considered a good methodology in order to invent the future, but then it all are often sadly — it still remains a beautiful vision.

But in conjunction with adaptive leadership, a modern approach to management is possible to implement the plans. Researchers Maya Bernstein and Marty Linsky propose a methodology for “responsive design” at the crossroads of design thinking and adaptive leadership which allows you to introduce bold ideas and changes. The name, however, is not very successful because it employs responsive – and adaptive-techniques of working with chain of devices and screens.

Researcher Donald Norman in recent years, actively promoting the methodology DesignX for the solution of complex social, economic and political problems. This theory helps to rebuild socio-technical systems step by step, a series of small changes instead of one ambitious redesign. Such initiatives require intervention in the cultural characteristics, methods and practices, the reorganization of the working groups of different specialties, so to be expected cause the conflicts in which POPs up domestic policy.

The result requires so many compromises and unforeseen changes in the course of that “swoop” can only come to failure. So you need to “eat the elephant in pieces” and constantly adjust the vision of the future. This theory is described in his joint article with Peter Jan Stappers. An interesting approach bundles the business and UX strategy used by the company Intuit.

It works on three levels — the mission (design as an agent of social change), the company (design Department and a professional skill) and the product (design good experiences). Approach “missions” allows you to achieve long-term goals, each of which is described at several levels (values, goals, strategy, priorities, metrics), and, ideally, should determine every grocery solution. In his presentation at UX STRAT USA 2016 Jeffrey Onken proposes to consider the stages of the maturity model UX as a normal customer journey map.

In this form it is much easier to detect and correct problems that hinder the creation of good design. In his book “How to Make an Enterprise UX Friendly. A Quick Guide to” the company Justinmind offers a template for the description of UX strategy:

Theories and models of the change process in the classical theory of management abound. For example, an 8-step approach of John Kotter. Leah Boule sensibly describes the difference between business strategy and UX strategy, pointing out the weaknesses of the last. It has two interpretations:

In a master class for UX STRAT USA 2016 it describes your approach to design change. Brian Solis uses the OPPOSITE methodology for step-by-step digital transformation of the company:

In this publication, interested in everything — and the fact that it focuses on understanding the proper words, and the fact that it was released already in 2006. Rosa Wu and Jess McMullin describe your approach to change, consisting of three stages: Well, then the process goes in a circle — to evaluate the success of the pilot, to launch a new and again to tell about the success. This will help find like-minded people and new projects for improvement.

Head of Salesforce, Marc Benioff has created a methodology V2MOM to determine future plans. Writes them each Department and employee, so the result is a complete chain of control from the main business goals to specific actions that connects all parts of the strategy together: The General idea is very similar to the OKR in its solid form.

Japanese management practices are widely demanded in the last decade thanks to the mixture of simplicity and orderliness. Toyota uses a 4-step approach “Kata” for the transition from the current situation to the future: Darren hood from Bosch spoke at the UX Strategies Summit 2015 on how to use a “Kaizen” changes in the design of the company.

This, again, numerous continuous small improvements, each of which adds value to the user, or reduces the cost of the company. And on all fronts, not only in the framework of the product — training and motivation of employees, relations with users and so on. Although more and more companies are gaining momentum in terms of reinterpretation and systematization of the design, bright reference cases not so much. Will give some typical examples.

In 2013, a large consulting company Accenture has bought well-known design Agency Fjord. Celia Romaniuk, head of the London office Studio, says that the General Director of Accenture was the protagonist of the Studio and design in General, so he gave a seat at the table of decision-making and strongly supported, although not fully understand the designers themselves. The head Celia at Accenture told her that the company is full of good and bad people, so it is necessary to keep the first and not think about a second, then get it.

In the end, the Fjord has become a catalyst of change for the company, because it clearly showed that it is possible to do so gradually began to penetrate other divisions. They selectively introduce General for Accenture things to preserve the original culture of the Fjord — dont use a grading system, have a separate marketing and other activities, but we try to integrate the maximum. It is important to pay attention to the management of the design and the value that it brings. As a result, people are becoming more educated in design and design in General helps a lot in organizational changes.

This integration experience, the company now uses client projects — for example, to their customers Commerzbank similar catalyst of change was bought by a design Agency, which changed the Bank from the inside. The company has created the position of Vice President of product design and start changes with pilot projects. Instead of imposing the need to redesign all units at once (not everyone understood the value of design), the company alternately worked with anyone who was willing.

The results of the first pilot was so successful that other products also wanted to work with intelligent designers. They got credibility with this example, and since then, working closely with cross-functional teams to achieve critical business objectives. Says Vice President of product design Citrix Julie Baer, “your task is to modify the operating system of the company.”.

David Butler of Coca-Cola studied the principles of other companies that have learned to use design to solve strategic tasks. He began to work in a team of branding and communications, then moved to the packaging and equipment, then in retail sales, but in the end — on business transactions, including the distribution and delivery. Although he spends a lot of time on professional development design, it does not use words like “design thinking” when dealing with business and trying to speak their language — all initiatives should boost sales.

Brian beaver from Eventbrite tells how the design team was able to convince management to allocate resources for the creation of a design system. Along with marketers and financiers, they considered how much it costs for the company running functions with the current set of technologies and how much more profitable and fast will be the new approach. Sensible story Parish Hanna, head of ergonomics and user experience of Ford, about how the company is changing itself. One of the key moments was the reference UX improvements to the companys mission is “to make peoples lives better.”.

The first attempt to bring order to the product line in 2007 failed, but when the head of the company in 2011 became the founder Larry page, he made a quality UX, one of the key tasks. The leader changes from the side of the design is Matias Duarte, head Android design. He felt that the centralization design in the company with so many products impossible, and gathered a small working group UXA.

After the team found strong visual-interface concept, she worked with the designers of specific products to implement. Now the relationship between the visual language and the product works both ways — designers in the fields bring to the common pot of fresh patterns and solutions. And Mathias acts as Evangelist of the Association of efforts of different teams under a single vision of design — in many ways, this was helped by his close relationship with Larry page and the ability to communicate ideas to top management. The head of IBM Virginia Rometty saw the enterprise software market is changing — instead of complex implementation in the whole company, where the solution often takes the it Department-procurement increasingly specific functional units pay a subscription for any service, and they are more demanding to the quality of the product (including usability).

The head of a recently purchased startup to Phil Gilbert, who was an Evangelist of good design, has offered to scale it best practices across the company. He announced an ambitious goal to hire and train 1000 designers — but didnt expect it really. But he received not only a welcome, but unexpected question. How fast can you implement this plan?.

Only in the company of 400 thousand employees, and centralization of examination impossible in practice. The bet was made on a laboratory incubator in Austin (TX), which deals with study of typical processes, visual language, training. In the end, the main goal is improving the overall design culture in the company, “selling” the value of design management at different levels, working sessions and workshops to transfer knowledge and experience. One of the tools for this mentoring.

Serious attention to the users in the company have started paying in 2004 with the introduction of NPS. But by 2007 the growth rate slowed down — the number of critics to reduce managed, but the evangelists did not appear. Founder of Intuit Scott cook staged a five-hour lecture on the benefits of design for the companys managers, but not really touched them. But the speakers behind him Alex Kazaks conducted a small master class on solving problems through design, which is “hooked” almost all.

This led to the appointment of Karen Hanson is responsible for the dissemination of best practices across the company, and Intuit has launched a program “catalysts of innovation”, which helped product teams to improve the UX, and then doing it yourself. The number of “catalysts” since then it has grown largely thanks to the goal — try to do at least three or four projects a year with a clear result. From Mauro Porcini, PepsiCo believes the key components of the success of design in the companys strong design leader who is able to combine into a coherent picture of the different components (brand, industrial design, interior design, UX, innovation) and support of top management and the confirmation of the success of design teams from within and from the.

Quick wins will help to begin the journey in five stages of maturity of the design. CEO Indra Nooyi praises his approach. One of the first steps to change was the assignment of the companys management. To photograph the design examples that they consider good.

Albums brought only a couple of people, the other wives asked or done nothing at all. It showed that they do not understand what is design. Since then much has changed and the company, for example, clearly sees the connection between design and innovation — the latter brought the company a 9% profit in 2014. In order to systematically engage in innovation, it was necessary to rebuild the culture and easier to relate to failures and rapid cycles of product development.

Indra is confident that if earlier companies had to re-invent yourself every 10 years, now the speed has increased, and this should be done every 2-3 years. In the second half of 90-ies of the Vice President of Samsungs design strategy EN Yon Lee suggested that the company abandon the practice of creating cheap copies of competitors products with new design philosophy. He was not met with widespread support, and after the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the company altogether has cut investment in design.

Academy wanted to leave, but his boss suggested to go through serious training management and organizational planning. In 2000 he created the Corporate Design Center which is responsible for the vision and its implementation in different departments. Although the company is still periodically criticized for copying, a significant number of products are more than worthy. Although over the years the company has gained a very heavy legacy to difficult corporate systems, SAP invests a lot of resources in the restructuring of the company.

Chronology of key initiatives: Within this series I described how organizations become more Mature in terms of design, described the main points of focus for design Manager (hiring the right designers, the creation of a design system, building a design culture, proper goal-setting), and proposed a check-list, allowing to implement all this. We hope that you will be able to change your company.

For me, this series was not only the presentation and structuring of thoughts, but an opportunity to think about the future of design in the portal team Mail.Ru Group. Each article described about the middle of the road — where are we now and where are we heading. A kind of public commitment that further spurred to move forward. One of the main ideas that I want to additionally mention at the end, the designers themselves have to initiate the changes in the company.

No one will take you by the hand, do not sit down at the table making decisions and not say. “heres the plan, it remains only to realize it”. Hire you to make you was more experienced and far-sighted all in his business and they showed where the problems and how to solve them. And then, gritting his teeth, passed through all the difficulties and hardships.

Change your attitude to change and just take action. And most importantly — play out in the long term. The redesign is a task for a few years, not months. It affects not only the products and their visual component, but also the organization itself, its worldview and culture.

Keep your eye on the goal as on the restructuring of the socio-technical system, not just upgrading multiple screens. After all, the reason bad foods is a bad machine which produces them, so need to repair the first. Send your speakers and front-end cases [email protected]

Leave a Reply