Application Envisioning idea
G6.

In some cases, it can be useful for knowledge work applications to adaptively incorporate “outside” feeling, potentially unexpected content into specific interactions. Product teams can envision how ”pushed” domain information, presented as an optional resource, might expand workers’ understanding
of a subject and inform their decision making.

Examples from three knowledge work domains:
(Illustrated above) A financial trader begins booking a deal in his trading application and is presented with a brief advisory created by analysts within his own firm. The advisory relates specifically to the item that he is about to trade, and based on its proprietary
insights, he decides to cancel the deal.
An architect uses her building modeling application to label a certain area of a floor plan as kitchen space. In the tool’s notifications pane, a list of defined client requirements appears with the word kitchen highlighted in each item. The pane also presents product information for appliances that need to be incorporated into the kitchen space.
A scientist selects a specific gene variant within in a large clinical data set in her analysis application. The application then presents a small notification that provides links to recent research papers with findings related to the variant.
Knowledge workers in many domains struggle to keep key information in their awareness while making decisions (E1). This problem is made worse when potentially relevant information is extensive or updated frequently (I6), creating a situation where it is difficult for people to know when there could be value in seeking supporting content.
Product teams can envision targeted situations where their computing tools might provide value by “pushing” trusted information (I5, K10, K12) that is presumed to be related to workers’ intents based on preceding interactions (K3). In some situations, this adaptive presentation of content can be thought of as a high level form of error prevention, aiming at complex cases that may not be preventable with strictly defined application logic (C9, G3). These information displays, rather than being just another demand on workers’ attentions (D1, D3, D4), may also be envisioned as lightweight, opportunistic suggestions that may open up possibilities for individuals to make
unexpected and serendipitous connections (D6, F3).
When product teams do not actively consider the potential role of supplemental information that is adaptively presented in specific interaction contexts, innovative opportunities to meaningfully support workers’ synthesis and decision making practices can be lost. Highly pertinent information, stored outside of workers’ typical paths, may never be seen in an influential, “just in time” way, leading to less inventive or lower quality work outcomes (K5, L1).
Conversely, if “pushed” information does not deliver relatively consistent value,
people may find it distracting and try their best to ignore it (D7).
See also: A, C4, E2, E3, F11, G, I

Application Envisioning questions:
How might your team’s functionality concepts automatically incorporate useful, supplementing content into the flow of certain interactions? How might the adaptive appearance of contextually related information positively influence knowledge workers’ choices and outcomes?
More specific questions for product teams to consider:
How do targeted individuals currently use supplemental or reference information
in the work practices that your team is striving to mediate?
What specific sources do workers trust? Why?
Are valued sources created within targeted organizations, or do they come from openly available online references and outside, networked vendors?
What value do preferred sources provide in targeted individuals’ decision making processes? How are they relevant?
Which sources are considered underused and could often be influential if knowledge workers took time to explore them?
Which change frequently or are too extensive to keep mentally available?
How might your application concepts meaningfully “tap into” or connect with certain preferred sources? Could the development of reference content become
a service oriented element of your team’s product?
When and where within your team’s functionality concepts could there be value in adaptively pushing suggested content from trusted sources into the periphery of users’ displays?
In which targeted operations and larger tasks could such functionality become a persistent, unwanted distraction?
What programmatic logic could effectively search for supplemental information
that “fits” various situations?
How attention grabbing and directive should pushed information be, given the nature of the work practices that it is intended to support?
How might the relevancy of certain information sources change over time?
What customization options could allow targeted individuals and organizations to receive only their preferred content?
Do you have enough information to usefully answer these and other envisioning questions? What additional research, problem space models, and design concepting could valuably inform your team’s application envisioning efforts?
< PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE >

Back to top | View Table of Contents
|