Success is Analog: CX can be as important as UX
[The design process blended with business objectives will produce artifacts enabling desired UX. Success, though, is measured with CX (Client Experience), in terms of risk mitigation in a business context.]
First, a note of clarification: I try to be very aware of my audience when I drop the ubiquitous term “UX,” as it’s come to mean different things to different people. In my personal lexicon, UX is simply “user experience”, referring generically to the ultimate objective of any design effort. I also recognize the term has gained a specific distinction in the domain of digital design to distinguish the user-facing aspects of app design, say, from the design of software driving the app or the supporting digital platform. All good. I think we can all keep that straight, yes?
So with the confidence that all of you have the brain space for yet another such term, I’d like to introduce you to CX, or “client experience”, showing you how this critical element of life in a service business can be a powerful approach to product development anywhere where the broader user experience version of UX is important.
Early in my career, with the ink still wet on my master’s degree in product design, I held a certain arrogance about the sanctity of design, that a solution forged in some notion of a pure design effort is the ideal we strive for. Input from others in the company – finance, marketing, sales, manufacturing, operations – sullies this purity and diminishes what the product might have been if the designers weren’t otherwise handcuffed by the unfortunate constraints of these other aspects of the business. Right.
The reality, of course, is brought into crisp focus in a consulting firm like Spanner, where the marketplace success of any product we help design is only an indirect factor in the long term health of our business inasmuch as a successful product affects our reputation and volume of referred business. The stronger factor is, yes, CX. To be sure, we absolutely have to get the design, engineering and product development strategy right, bringing experience, expertise and skills to our work. That’s baseline. To ensure we have a future in business, however, we also have to nail the CX, just like in any other client services industry.
To do that, we count on the same proven process we apply to the design of a product – developing empathy for the client (user) within their larger business (life) concerns, building an understanding of how elements of the product in question can either alleviate or counter those concerns, and bringing timeline & budget realities into the same arena as other pragmatic design constraints. Early conversations with clients and initial phase objectives include a great deal of work around the client’s vision for their company, strategies for the brand, and tactics for how the product fits into that vision, as well as any roadmap for other future products. These elements shape product definition and development plans right alongside the personas, user journeys, mood boards and stakeholder maps more familiarly part of early stage design activities.
At the risk of stating the obvious, a gorgeously devised and executed design doesn’t serve anyone if it either fails to launch by depleting budgets too quickly, or becomes unsustainable in manufacture because the true cost of goods (COGS) wipes out any margin. Other risks to success abound, unrelated to the product in a direct sense. But thinking about the product in a “direct sense”, outside any larger context, is precisely the problem. By definition, design does not exist or function in a vacuum. The expression of a distinct point of view using the elements of design like form, line, mass, composition, proportion, color, material, finish, etc. is called art. Design is inescapably a commercial undertaking, regardless of whether or not we think monetary considerations sully our grand campaigns.
We measure the success of a design in both its capacity to fulfill the promise of a better user experience, AND its ability to do so while supporting a business plan. It’s in that sense that success is never binary, black and white, but infinitely variable, analog. Great design lives in a dynamic balance of concerns from both the commercial enterprise domain and the aesthetic experiential domain as equally valid, equally important partners.
While we at Spanner pay attention to some aspects of CX not necessarily germane to a corporate setting, most of the pragmatic elements are not only relevant, but critical in every setting. In a consulting role, we accept as overhead, for example, the need to ensure clients are well informed on the progress of a program, providing that information in a way that speaks to objectives and frames decisions in the context of business and strategic implications. Clients have a right, after all, to understand how the program is going as a part of their businesses at large. We also schedule regular leadership syncs outside all the tactical hubbub to keep those larger objectives in sharp focus, all of which is done with somewhat more prep and polish than one might see “in house” within an internal development team.
Polished templates notwithstanding then, the core approach to CX brings value to product development on a number of fronts. For starters, design and engineering resources as an expense are often not tracked in corporate settings. While this can make sense if sales revenue will eventually dwarf the payroll attributed to development in terms of cost of goods, the resource expense will often also be a significant strategic consideration when choices are made assigning limited resources to certain programs over others. Internal “clients” like product managers and marketing executives need to be able to weigh options relative to lost opportunity or ROI for selected programs to map a more confident path to a healthy business in the future. For designers and engineers, this is context for considering the scope of tech development required, the complexity of parts and assemblies, the level of performance and testing standards specified, for example, as choices both impacting budget and shaping design.
Likewise, the complexity of part designs and material specs directly affect capital expenses for tooling and fixtures, as well as cash flow demands at production start when vendors may require full payment of material costs in advance of procurement. That may not align well with the funding calendar an entrepreneur or product manager is liable for. Similarly, overly complicated fabrication processes lead to less efficient supply chains with big MOQs and higher prices for specialty services. For example, an aluminum frame structure may be lighter and provide more opportunity for unique forms when using hydroformed tubing, but the higher tooling costs, longer lead times and increased process costs may not justify the move away from more conventional solutions. At Spanner, we investigate these types of trade-offs in the earliest strategic phases of a program to enable clients to make holistic, informed choices.
On the other hand, a big investment in thoughtful branding, compelling industrial design, clever technology, and excellent fit & finish may be entirely warranted if that supports the vision for the product, paving the way for other products on the roadmap to follow.
What matters is that the concerns of product managers, marketers and other stakeholders in new product development are equally valid and important factors influencing design and engineering choices alongside more familiar considerations in design and engineering. Working in the belief there’s some mythical ideal design solution made less so by compromises to business concerns is denying the fundamentally commercial nature of design itself.
Arne Lang-Ree is co-founder and CDO of Spanner.
An innovator, thinker and deconstructor, Arne challenges himself and Spanner’s clients to bring sustainable and responsible products to life. Born in Norway, Arne was inspired early by his engineer father to look at things twice. At an early age, he was imagining inventions that ultimately inspired him to earn both his BSME in Mechanical Engineering and MSE in Product Design from Stanford University. Arne has since racked up more than 30 years of product development and mechanical design experience in a wide range of product markets and with globally recognized brands. Arne is rarely without his trusted canine sidekick, Penny, and the duo can be found at the Spanner office creating together or walking the Silicon Valley for inspiration.
Interested in learning more about what it’s like to collaborate with Spanner?