Description

Article on the value of design for wearble technology published by The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/sep/04/co-design-wearable-technology

After much fanfare, we are still no closer to a mainstream uptake of wearable tech.

Research from the US shows a third of consumers who bought a wearable product stopped using it after just six months and of the one in 10 Americans who own an activity tracker, half of them no longer use it.

There are mixed perceptions among the public about what wearable tech actually is and what it can do.

This is largely because of the way wearable technology and its associated gadgets are designed. There has been something of a gold rush, with several key players in the electronics industry racing to release their products ahead of the competition.

Many have either lacked the wow factor or been too expensive, too ugly or, because of the data they gather, too scary in terms of their implications for our privacy.

Manufacturers’ focus has tended to be on a technology push. They are trying to invent new user experiences and new areas of use or applications. But with limited user input.

Several products showcase science fiction-like features and so-called smart technology but fail in serving any user need.

Such gadgets should come with the disclaimer that smart technology does not necessarily imply smart products. Or a smart use, for that matter.

Take the range of products in the area of fitness, health and wellbeing, for instance. These are at the forefront of wearable tech gadgets on the market at the moment.

They are good at capturing and showering the user with lots of data on how well or not they are performing. But there are three big issues with this.

First of all, how does one make sense of the plethora of information? Even once those numbers have been successfully deciphered, how relevant and useful are they? In other words – what type of data actually matters to users?

Secondly, how wearable are they? For health or fitness related applications to work properly, wearable gadgets need to be worn all the time. For that to happen they must be designed to fit in well with the lifestyles of every wearer.

What is particularly important for health-related wearable products is that they are not seen as a health intervention (due to the stigma attached to that) but rather associated with leisure and fun.

Thirdly, assuming these gadgets are useful for users who are already into fitness, how can wearable products address the bigger market of non-physically active people? How can they trigger behavioural change and motivate people to become fitter or follow a healthier lifestyle in the first place?

So the big question is how do we design wearable tech products that everyone actually wants to wear?

Their design needs to be user-centric as opposed to technology-centric. A user-led approach will see designs drawn up with users rather than for them.

Co-design – where prospective users become designers themselves – could pave the way for new and exciting wearable products the public actually want, need and are more likely to use.

A co-design process typically incorporates a number of creative workshops where different groups, but mostly prospective end users, take part. The users become the designers while professional designers and developers simply facilitate the process.

These workshops start by exploring users’ values, aspirations, visions and ideas, which are then realised in products.

Co-designing with users has the potential to be truly transformative as they become shared owners of the innovation, having a much greater stake in its design, creation and eventual use.

The key message? That the needs of users come first and technology should then follow to fulfil those. This could be the key to creating the next range of successful wearable tech.

Emmanuel Tsekleves is a researcher at Lancaster University