Intention and Use

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY96hTb8WgI

Misleading objects are all around us. While nature needs no instruction, man-made products are extremely subjective tools. The intended use more often than not can be passed over by instinctual understanding. Is a design poor if it needs instructions? Is it great if it needs no explanation? Is relying on simplicity in products contrary to pushing design experimentation?

An evident example of faulty design is the common door. Most everyone has experienced the struggle with whether to pull or push to open a door. The most common indicator would be a push bar versus a handle. Most doors now have resorted to adding a "pull" or "push" plaque to help the user. This solution is a band-aid to an underlying issue of product intention and use. Design and psychology expert Don Norman, authored a book titled "The Design of Everyday Things" which focuses on effective human-centered design and lack thereof in today's products.

I have run into the issue of design intention and user action in my paper plate project earlier this semester. My design involved folding the plate to cut, unfolding to scoop, and refolding to eat. From the designer's perspective asking the user to do something or giving them instruction seems fairly straightforward. But in practice design is very different. Users will often not use your product exactly as intended. However, I recognize this as a challenge to observe and incorporate human factors in the creation process. For what is product design if not made for humans and what feels natural.