This article by Don Norman (http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/human-centered.html) got me thinking about good experience design.  In essence the article is talking about balance and context – do you aim to design something that entirely matches every human need?  No, you compromise.

An experience will always be a compromise between the experience and what people will pay for it.  The key is finding the biting point between the ideal expeirence and what people will pay for it.  It’s not a poor experience that bothers me, it’s often the gap between what you were promised v. the experience you actually got that vexes me.

Take Ryan Air – they get the balance right and have a good business model because you know what you are getting.  The service doesn’t try to adapt around you too much, otherwise it would be expensive and that isn’t why you decided to fly with them.

Another example, we were in a Lebanese restaurant this weekend and had a nice meal with great service.  They didn’t include the tip (like most places in London) and as we left they gave us a box of free Lebanese sweets!  We tipped more and left really happy!

Going back to the Don Norman article, I think the point is not about being Human Centred or Activity Centred in your design technique – it strikes me that’s semantics and perhaps shows the age of the article.  Being Activity Centred is inherently part of UCD, HCD and Agile techniques.

The point is about designing an experience that sets customers’ expectations in line with the experience they are going to get from you.  As a bonus, try to add a twist (like the Lebanese sweets) that goes beyond what people expect in competitive times so they come back for more.