First of all, thanks for all the feedback I received in the comments or via email after my first call. In a way of working similar to the Delphi method I have now incorporated your comments in the recommendations. The additions or changes are listed in red (like this) and in most cases I have motivated them in the comment section of the post.

Now that the overview of all recommendations is complete, I would like to invite you one more time to give your feedback. Based on that input I will perform a second and final iteration of the recommendations, which I will publish in my PhD thesis. And as promised earlier, I will mention everyone that makes a (serious) contribution.

Below is the complete list of recommendations. The ones that I made changes to are labeled with an asterisk (*). I will be taking a summer break from blogging for a short while and will return in August. I hope you enjoy the full list.

"People always talk about ease of use, but I think it’s more... I don’t think it gets into the play in the buying process. It's more of a dissatisfier, I guess..." (Market intelligence manager)

Advertising usability is no guarantee for success

Summary

Because:	Requires:
-   ‘Easy to use’ products stigmatize buyers -   Usability is not an important purchase consideration -   Advertising usability raises expectations	-   Having other purchase arguments besides usability -   Have buyers experience the product in-store -   Marketing message that implies usability and highlights the benefits -   Marketing message that blames products for being unusable, not people for not understanding them

Relevant posts on uselog
> Hoover goes ergonomic: the Freemotion
> The Flip: video doesn't come any easier
> Usability as sales argument for Sharp copiers
> Bahco: Ergonomic Tools

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.

"Network operators are very interested to have things in phones that force people to use the network to download something onto the handset. So for example, a network operator may prefer a handset to ONLY support music which is downloaded. (....) Often operators will ask us to limit certain features and functions in a handset to force the consumer to use network based services." (Product marketing manager)

Service providers and retailers have their own preferences
Companies that in the end sell a product development group’s products to consumers, such as retailers and service providers, often have their own ideas about what a product should do, based on their own interests. For example, a telecom service provider makes money by users making calls and would not be terribly delighted by a phone with a built-in voicemail box. And as in electronic consumer products retail functionality often is a primary sales argument, retailers may demand a large amount of functions including functions that, from a user experience perspective, are unnecessary.

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.

[Photo: humedini]

"There are what we call self-select environments, where (...) you pick the box up and you take it to the cash register. (....) But in many of the more advanced retail environments there are people that who actually go through a service cycle with you, who will demonstrate the product." (Product marketing manager)

Experience usability before purchase
Because consumers can have a hard time judging a product’s usability before purchase usability is usually considered a long-term benefit: initially it may not increase sales numbers, but it does increase customer satisfaction, thus brand loyalty, and thus may lead to repeat sales. But your sales numbers could benefit directly from your products being usable. If you believe your products really are usable, you might want to make that usability visible to buyers. One strategy can be to enable buyers to experience them before and during purchase; what Lincoln and Thomassen (2007) refer to as ‘merging buying and trying’.

Fully functional products on display
This requires products to be fully functional and accessible to users when on display at sales points. This includes other components of the ecosystem being hooked up, and the products not being locked away in display cabinets, but freely accessible to customers. What also helps is sales staff that is actually knowledgeable about the products they are selling, and that can guide potential buyers while trying a product.

Appearance can raise expected usability
A second - but somewhat risky - strategy is to give potential buyers a hint about the usability of your products by giving them an appearance that accurately conveys their level of usability: align expected usability with actual usability. But then you'd better be sure you live up to what you promise, because if you set expectations too high, it becomes harder to satisfy users.

Summary

Because:	Requires:
-   Usability must be experienced	-   Usable products -   Fully functional products at sales points -   Customers can access products freely -   Knowledgeable sales staff -   Optional: product appearance that raises expected usability

Relevant posts on uselog
> Study: expected versus experienced usability
> Stabilo 's Move Easy: high expected usability
> Expected usability: all buttons to the back (don't forget to read the comments, I rest my case ;-))
> How consumers get themselves into usability trouble
> Shop demos: Don’t try me, just buy me
> Selling usable products: The roots of Apple’s retail stores
> A consumer's manual to buying a usable product

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.

[Photo: reflexer]

"You should really get your people to care about usability, and that requires making a strong case about why usability is important. It should not be something that comes up now and then; it should really be at the core." (Usability specialist)

Positive attitude towards usability
Product development means compromising. Development teams have to weigh product properties and then figure out how to realize as much of them as possible with the available resources. To create usable products, usability should be prioritized in at least some of the decisions. This can be positively influenced by a user-centred attitude among product developers, which in turn can be fostered by a user-centered company culture. In addition, running a user-centered product development process can require a significant investment of resources (time, people, money), which is unlikely to happen in a company that does not consider usability important.

Enabling a user-centered company culture
Such a culture is enabled by product developers understanding and appreciating usability, seeing the results of their work in user tests and after sales feedback, and having customer satisfaction (which is impacted by usability) as a key performance indicator. A user-centred company culture is also fostered by upper management prioritizing usability and if product developers perceive usability to be a part of their company’s brand promise. As such, a company's brand position does not only communicate to potential customers what to expect, but also to product development teams what promise they have to live up to.

Prioritization of usability
As usability is a long-term non-quantifiable product quality, it is unlikely to be prioritized if more short-term, quantifiable product properties, such as system stability, production quality, aesthetics and functionality are not yet at a sufficient level. If the short-term quantifiable product properties are at a certain minimum - satisfactory - level, that increases the chance of usability becoming a priority.

Summary

Because:	Requires:
-   Product development = compromising - User-centered product development requires a significant investment	-   Knowing if and why usability is important -   Team members seeing the results of their work -   Customer satisfaction as performance indicator -   Viable product proposition and stable technical platform -   Upper management gets and prioritizes usability -   Usability (perceived as) part of a company’s brand promise

Relevant posts on uselog
> Motorola's company culture obstructs good design
> Philips: Sense and Simplicity
> Organizational aspects and consumer product usability

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.

[Photo: Marketingfacts]

"Usability is very important for our products. We have a board member who's always saying: 'If my wife can't use it, it's not good enough.'" (Product manager)

Power brokers
One of the most influential factors to determine whether a company can successfully deal with usability is upper management (development group managers as well as corporate managers). First of all, managers decide about the resources that are assigned to development projects and groups. Secondly, as argued earlier, upper management is the only actor that can ensure different product development groups cooperating on a product or product family. Finally, the attitude of upper management can seriously impact company culture. If management is seen to prioritize usability, product development teams are more likely to do so as well.

Upper management needs to understand its products
For upper management to prioritize goals (product quality, usability) over resources (time, money, staff) they will need to understand their own products. If it is not clear to them how a product works, they will not understand how certain design decisions impact product quality. And thus they will prioritize concrete, short-term effects (i.e., resources) over ungraspable, long-term ones (i.e., product quality). Also, to have an effect on the individual product development projects, upper management will need to be involved in, or at least have knowledge about product development projects.

Appoint a creative director
In the movie industry, apart from the producers, who ensure that making the film runs smoothly from a financial and project management point of view, there usually is a creative director, who is ultimately responsible for the quality of the creative work. In companies where upper management does not understand its own products and/or product development, I would argue for appointing an - equally powerful - creative director, who balances the process and resource-oriented view of other managers. Bear in mind that the word 'creative' in creative director refers to the process of creation, not to being responsible for thinking outside the box.

But to be honest, I would prefer a situation where upper management actually gives a damn about their products and how they're created.

Summary

Because:	Requires:
-   Product development = compromising and upper management decides about resources -   Upper management can ensure development groups within a company cooperate -   Upper management influences company culture	Upper management that: -   understands its products -   understands (and prioritizes) usability -   is involved in product development

Relevant posts on uselog
> Want to make an iPhone killer? Think this over...
> TeliaSonera wants usability
> Microsoft's Steve Ballmer in 2007: why the iPhone is not a good proposition

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.

"To be honest, to provide a proper user experience, we should have integrated their product with our own. Or ours with theirs. But they were in a different division." (Product manager)

Electronic consumer products are networked
Electronic consumer products are becoming more and more networked. Many of the most serious usability problems are caused by the system as a whole, not by user interfaces on the individual products. Try to ensure that your product works well in the eco-system in which they will be embedded. Either by creating industry-wide standards (hard to achieve, not always upheld) or by making sure your company owns all components of a product’s eco-system (costly). Owning the eco-system ensures you can coordinate the application of user experience design guidelines, and deal with connectivity and interoperability issues.

Limited collaboration between product groups
But even if your company as a whole develops all components of the eco-system, there is no guarantee that development will be in a coordinated fashion, as often these components are developed in separate development groups, between which collaboration can be limited.

Because:	Requires:
-   Products keep changing (integration required) -   Product usability > interface usability - System usability > product usability	-   Owning the eco-system -   Development groups within company cooperating -   High level visionary -   Product development groups in one location -   Budget -   Guts

Relevant posts on uselog
> Consumer electronics have become complex systems
> Ensuring consistency and interoperability: monopolize or standardize

NOTE
This recommendation is a part of a series of recommendations for industry on how to deal with usability in product development, which are the outcome of a PhD research project. Product development professionals and researchers were invited to provide feedback, based on which a first iteration of the recommendations was performed (changes and additions are listed in red). Currently the second round of feedback is being collected. You can still provide input.