Function, keep us from the dark side…

Now as most people that know me can confess, I am in no means a fan of Star Wars (most people will probably stop reading now). Truth be told I haven’t the slightest clue how many films have even been created thus far. So do forgive me if my post isn’t latent with Star Wars film references or characters.
Unlike my fellow designer (Andrea) my character knowledge is limited to Jabba the Hutt only cause I remember him from my childhood, and I tend to prefer a bit more Moonwalker than Skywalker.
Although we’ve sat side-by-side for a few years now, occasionally bickering about irrelevant topics in the grand scheme of things, this whole Form vs Function debate seems to have taken our ‘designer’ discussions to a whole new level…

What’s the purpose of this?

The debate is on. Which follows the other? Should form define function, or does function dictate form. It’s a question I would so love to ask any one of the great designers of our generation, and those of generations past… Designers that focussed on the true essence of their creations. What’s the purpose, the offering, the user benefit?
Greats like Ferdinand Porsche, who gave birth to the humble VW Beetle and later the ever-classic Porsche range. A legacy that has produced and given form to some of the most beautiful machines known to man.
His origins, though, as the designer of the Beetle, where not focussed towards the form we associate with his brand nowadays. Rather, it was to create the most functional vehicle possible. A vehicle that would be inexpensive to produce and can be sold to the masses. Boring right? Not exactly, not when we consider how his functional design inspired generations, not to mention going on to be one of the best-selling cars of all time.
Even the Porsche range we know today, with all of its form over function appearance, still maintain the same Function First fundamentals. Admittedly, they are cars of beauty, drooled upon by most (including myself ), but this beauty is nothing more than a representation of the brand’s ‘purpose’ to produce vehicles with exceptional driving performance. A vehicle which functions flawlessly. So much so that Porsches haven’t really changed in form since inception.

It better function, or else!

Function has given birth to so many of our much-loved gadgets and gizmo’s. Cell phones turned smartphones, Walkman turned iPod, big things scaled to tiny things, all born from the need of greater functionality. Their form, an expression of current trends or simply to accommodate their new incarnations.
No, I’m not saying we shouldn’t focus on appearance or form, of course, we must. After all, as Andrea so rightly expressed in his post, items of beauty tend to capture our imagination and our undying desire for all things shiny and clickable. But I ask, what’s the point of browsing through a beautifully designed website, downloading a great looking App or buying the latest and greatest if it’s functionally useless?
Most users/consumers just want something that works, whether it’s a website, product or service. If it looks good then it will most likely have greater appeal. But in a world where plenty are likely to express their disappointment when faced with a product/service that hasn’t functioned or performed as expected (especially if we’ve paid good money for it), I argue that functionality is key.
My bet is that brands focusing their efforts on customer retention and brand loyalty will be hard pressed for luck if their offering isn’t up to par, even if it does look the part.

BB-8. Sure it’s not a Dyson?

Another great designer that springs to mind is James Dyson. You know, the guy that invented the weird vacuum with a ball stuck to the bottom. A revolutionary designer that has managed to combine the best of both form and function.
Sure, he didn’t invent the concept of the vacuum, nor did he invent any other product we haven’t already seen. His genius is his ability to revolutionise and enhance the way many conventional household products function, whilst packaging them in a more aesthetically pleasing form. As with Porsche, Dyson’s mantra has always been one of function first. So much so that even the brands television adverts purposely state that their products utilise patented technology, giving them a functional edge on their competitors.

Functionality. Built-in.

As with many debates, the points for and against either perspective are many. So yes, I do agree that form does play a very important part of any design, though functionality takes a design beyond the superficial. Though, in my opinion, functionality is the key factor that separates a nice design from a great one, allowing for greater user integration and thus a greater user experience.

The post Function or Form, That is The Question! appeared first on Switch - Digital & Brand.

The post U is for Usage appeared first on Switch - Digital & Brand.

Why should you test?

We test things on a daily basis. We try out a new route to work, we go for a test drive before purchasing a car, we try a new brand of cereals, or we test different hairstyles before picking the right look. We are constantly testing so that we can find the best option for ourselves, the one that works best and that we prefer. This is exactly what happens with a business, whether big or small. You test a campaign, you test a website or you test your social media. You want to see how your audience reacts to what you do, so as to find the strategy that works best for your company.
The easiest way to find out whether something works or doesn’t work for your business is through A/B testing. This type of testing will provide you with the information you need to have in order to understand how you should go about things. For instance, A/B testing will help you decide which emails people prefer reading, or which social media post works best.

What is A/B testing?

A/B test (or split testing) is simply using two variants that target the same audience at preferably the same time in order to see which performs better. Once you have analysed the results, you can adopt the winning variant.  For example, it’s been proven that using visuals on social media increases engagment. How was this proven? Through split testing: variant A involved posting a Facebook update without an image, while variant B involved positing the same update with an image. In this case, variant B was the winning one.

Examples of tests

Anything that requires a response can be tested. Emails, social media, call to action and websites. Let’s say that you wish to change the look of your homepage, and you have two designs in mind but you are not sure which one will have a better response. You can launch both of them, side by side, and see which one performs better – this way you will have a clearer idea of which is preferred by your audience and move forward with it.
Another example would be wishing to have more subscribers opening your newsletters. A way to go about it through A/B testing is by having two different subjects, send them to the same number of people and analyse the response after X amount of time (this can vary from thirty minutes, to eight hours – it’s up to you to decide). The version that would have been opened the most in the amount of time you would have decided on is the winning one. Through this type of testing you will be able to understand which subjects are more eye-catching and interesting to your audience.
You may wish to have more people purchasing products through your website. Consider changing the color of the purchase button  – you’ll be surprised by how much of a difference such a little alteration could make. Get creative and find out which option your audience prefers!
Check out how Obama managed to raise $60 million through testing.

The post T is for Test appeared first on Switch - Digital & Brand.