Tell Me Where it Hurts

A speaker at a customer experience conference remarked that website designers should react to customer suggestions in the manner of a parent whose child has walked into the room, announced that he has leukemia, and needs a cookie or he will surely die.   As much as I loathe metaphors that compare customers to children or animals (in that they fail to show the proper degree of respect for the most important party to any business transaction) I have to admit she makes a very good point.

Customers, and internal stakeholders for that matter, are fond of demanding a specific design solution when they do not understand the nature of the problem, even to the point of misrepresenting the actual problem in order to get what they want.   It would be as irresponsible of a designer to pander to their child's every desire without pausing to consider whether it's appropriate to do so.

Particularly when it comes to customer complaints and executive directives, a suggestion is not proof that a problem even exists.   It is not uncommon for people who want something to invent a reason it should be given to them.  To the original metaphor, the child simply wants a cookie, and is grasping for some reason that you must cater to this desire - to be a good parent means denying the request, particularly because giving into it would have negative consequences to the health of the child if he were given junk-food on demand.

In the same way, implementing a solution without considering the possible negative side-effects simply to accommodate a suggestion is very bad practice.   Sometimes, you can tell right away that it's a bad idea and should push back immediately - other times, it might seem to have some merit, but usability testing or a champion-challenger test in production will bear out that it does more harm than good.

Of course, sometimes you can't help it, particularly when the suggestion comes from a ranking officer in your own organization.  There's a distinct difference between giving a cookie to a child simply because he asked for it and giving a cookie to a child who's holding a loaded pistol so that he will put down the pistol (which itself is an excellent metaphor for certain executive personalities).  The first is inadvisable pandering, the second is necessary for survival.

On the topic of survival, the problem with implementing a suggestion without due consideration is that ultimately you will be held responsible, and rightly so.   Being a professional means exercising judgment and developing sound tactics, rather than acting upon random and unsound ideas from other sources.

And so, whenever someone suggests a problem exists, your first inclination should be the investigation of the problem rather than the hasty implementation of a solution.   When the child says he has leukemia, ask him to tell you where it hurts.   Listen, observe, and diagnose to make sure that you know what the problem is.   Exercise your own judgment in determining whether the problem is real or imaginary, and in deciding the course of action to take.

Unfortunately, all of this caters to the arrogant school of design, in which the designer fancies himself a maestro who doesn't have to listen to anything that anyone else has to say - but that extreme is just as wrong-headed.   Consider the metaphor of a doctor who ignores a patient's obvious wounds and instead decides (without even examining the patient) that because of their age, gender, weight, and so forth that they fit the profile of a patient who has hypertension.  That may well be, but it isn't the biggest problem of the moment, nor the reason they are seeking treatment.

As in many things, there is a balance to be achieved, and no shortcut to the solution.   You must pause to ask the questions to diagnose the problem rather than accepting the suggested solution, and you must give fair hearing to the complaint and deliberate over how the problem can be effectively solved - by the suggested means or otherwise.   Very often, people do know exactly what is wrong and have a pretty good idea for how the problem can be solved - but "very often" is neither always nor never.

The "always" and "never" of dealing with customer complaints are this:

• Always listen to suggestions
• Never implement them without due diligence

Ultimately, it's just as simple as that ... which is to say it's painstaking and difficult to have to constantly use your intelligence and judgment.  But because others don't, it falls to you as the gatekeeper who is charged with the decisions of what is done and what is not.