Human-Centered vs. User-Centered

After attending CHI 2009 I gained some perspective. It seems that the industry that I am about to dive into, full of youthful exuberance and naivety, has grossly understated the value and potential of HCI. The field of HCI seems to still be very focused on user-centered design, and sometimes uses the phrase human-centered design interchangeably. I don’t feel that human-centered design is user-centered design. This is not a new topic, as it has already seen some play in Interactions Magazine among other places. In what follows I will explain what I feel the difference is and why it is important to note it.

Take for example a “user experience” (UX) design team creating new machines and software for bank tellers. A user-centered approach would do task-flow analysis, maybe participatory design, and various other design methods. Then it would be on to the prototyping and usability testing with the users. The design team does a terrific job and the new system makes the bank tellers more efficient and the bank cuts down on errors, saving the bank tons of cash.

However, settling for this user-centered approach is shortsighted and is just a piece of what good HCI designers can potentially offer. If we take the broader view of experience and human-centered design, then we could make those bank tellers jobs more meaningful, or create valuable experiences for the workers and for the bank’s customers. The bank teller will give a good potion of his or her life to that job. If a bank teller has to spend 40+ hours a week at the bank and 5-10 more hours commuting and getting ready for the job, then it is the designer’s duty to design more than just efficiencies. The designer’s responsibility is to improve quality of life by improving the quality of the work experience.

User-centered vs. Human-centered:

User-centered design is just what it implies: designing for a user. There has been much debate about the word “user” and if it is even the appropriate word for us to be using. However I can make my point without having to go deep into that argument, and offer up a simplified definition here. It seems to me that the word “user” tends to define people as a part of the system instead of as the reason for the system. If people are merely part of the system then they might not receive the appropriate amount of attention in comparison to the technology. The problem here is that “users” end up serving as justification and measuring tools in the design process.

To me, human-centered differs from user-centered in that it takes a broader view of the design of technology. We don’t just “use” technology. We live with technology, experience it, love it, and hate it. In the past few years the world has changed substantially due to the introduction of new technology and cultures can be transformed almost overnight. Designers of technology wield considerable power that I feel is not completely understood. In the words of Peter Parker’s uncle, “With great power come great responsibility.” In the broad view, the “user-base” that I am designing for, my “demographic” is the population of planet Earth. I owe it to that population to apply ethics and morality to my design decisions. That is what “human-centered design” means to me.