Design Think Challenge

Lately I've been challenging myself to think like a designer again. I'm not too sure exactly what that means other than turning a more critical eye towards things in my every day life that can be improved.

As a designer, when I approach a problem or interface issue to be solved, I always start from certain knowns. Okay this is failing here. Okay I need to somehow add or layer this in on top of pre-existing functionality... I posed a question to a large group of professionals in my circle of colleagues by asking them, "If you could improve one experience in your every day life, what would it be?" The answers varied according to personal need and I thought what I'd presented was a brilliant approach to improving the overall experience of some aspect of life.

This morning while in my favourite brunch spot with Nate, I made the effort to reverse my design thinking by asking a different question. What if you could standardise one object or aspect of something in every day life, what effect do you think it would have?"

My first thought was something that has bugged me as an international traveller for years. Having to lug around power adaptors for my various devices and interchanging power plugs is the bane of any traveller's existence. If the end of the adaptor that plugged into the device itself were standardised, we'd only need one plug for everything. The AC power portion of the plug could be swapped out based on international wattage and power standards.

Ever in my search to simplify things at a mental level, I posed this theory to both of us. Imagine I standardised all the doors in the world. To enter via a door, it would be only a pull mechanism. To exit, it would only be a push. If no other variation were allowed on the entrance and exit to a place via a door which operated in this manner, what sorts of problems would this present for architects? Look beyond issues of style, and think of things like how spacing and manual function would be hampered by a door that needs to be opened outward. Handle design and accessibility for opening a door by pulling...

Many of us have this ingrained behavioural knowledge that when we approach a door, we pull to open. But if you've ever been in an office or building where the model is reversed or confusing, then it becomes a pain point and ultimately as a task, you fail.

At my old office in Sydney, we had these glass security doors that locked and were accessed by a magnetic tag at the top of the door. To enter, you swiped your id badge and the magnetic lock disengaged. You pull the door to go in. Exiting the office was a problem for many people.

On the opposite side of the door, you'd push a release button to disengage the lock and then you could exit by pushing on the door. However, the problem resulted from the visual cue presented to people trying to leave. The inside of the door had a handle identicle to the one on the outside which was for pulling. People naturally would pull... over and over, continually thinking the unlocking system had failed.

The frustration generated by this failed system and experience might seem minimal, but think about this. Imagine you had a client leaving from a meeting that didn't go so well. Is the last experience you want to provide them when leaving your office one of more frustration and disappointment over something so simple as a door?

The cartoon below is a perfect example of my new approach to design thinking. If we'd only replaced that handle with a large rectangular push panel. No handle would give users enough of a clue to push and not pull.

My brain is still considering all the pros and cons of standardising door mechanisms around the world.