So, Why Do Design Researchers Need to Be Storytellers?

The Boyhood of Raleigh by Sir John Everett Millais, oil on canvas, 1870.

Storytelling is big now, but why?

Essentially, if we put together what all these books, white papers, and company blog posts are saying, what we find is that stories give everything around us meaning- like the underlying theme in a story…. design is the part you don't see, but the part that makes the whole story worth while.

And, if this is true, then the job of the design researcher is to capture that meaning (by researching, understanding, and effectively communicating the characters, context, and plot of a product or service), to find where and when to add or remove meaning (minimizing bad experiences or give complicated ones a clear path) and ensure that the most essential parts of the story are carried on within new designs.

These bits of qualitative information are worth more than telling a designer where to put a button or how often a customer will use a product. …every bit as important as telling them where to put a button as why to put it there.

Innovation
Like any good story, design requires an editor- someone with a deep understanding of the theme, the reader, and knowledge of how they'll track to each other through the story. Editors help a story along, asking the writer for more bits where they're needed, cutting unnecessary plot points, and in helping to encourage the writer to take certain directions. Editors are an impartial set of eyes- they are liaisons, arbiters, if you will, between the reader and the writer- as so are design researchers between the designer and the user.

Testing
After research inspires innovation, one needs to test it, then gather the new stories to make sure that the design is effectively recreating an optimal experience for a variety of users. These new stories are just as important as the old ones, as they can find problems before they become expensive mistakes.

Stories in Design: When to (And Not to) Tell One

Earlier today, we were trying out our new system in the office, and tried to push the screen from an iPad to the TV. Although we all knew that it was possible, only one of us knew how easy it was. Had he not known the way to access the right button, our office story of Apple's ease would have been one of frustration and confusion.

I dare say that Apple's success is not it's magically intuitive design, but how easy it is to share the stories of how to use the product. How a lack of a user manual forces people to ask each other how to use it, and how a user feels as though they own the product after figuring out how to get email on their phone.

No manual means easter egg stories from a co-worker who tells you that the thing your holding has always had a button you never knew existed…. no manual allows the user to grow into a product without the overload.

No manual also means fewer words, and as any researcher can tell you, when every company has their own word for the same thing, words can hurt as much as they help. Our need to control our environment sometimes keeps us from actually interacting with it. So. How does this relate to story? If the button means nothing without the story behind it, how is it that not telling the user about the button can work?

What apple has done in removing the manual, is removed the jargon…..allowed the user to create their own story, mapping out the functions of their products that are most often used in obvious ways and listening to heavy users, creating hidden keys… a story to dive deeper into for those who choose to do so.

Apple has created a game, letting anyone start at level one- and enabling long time users to stretch their Mac skills- all but forcing new users to ask veterans how to do something only reinforces the game.

The question, now, is what happens when everyone knows how to use an apple?