Three indicators of quality

I’ve been spending a bit of time thinking about the kind of projects I like to work on, and the kind of freelance work that I’m really looking for. Looking at what I’ve worked on and created over the past 6-7 years, I think I’ve found a pattern in terms of projects that really make me content and satisfied and those that drill into me the sensation that I’ve been genuinely wasting considerable chunks of my life.

So, without further ado, I provide three questions that you can ask about a project that you are working on, or that you are planning or considering creating:

• Is it Fun?
• Is it Useful?
• Is it Interesting?

Perhaps this can be applied to other areas of work where you actually end up producing something e.g. product design, service design etc.

So to summarize, look at any given project, and answer these questions. If the answer to one is yes, then very good! Its a worthwhile project. If the answer to two is yes, then you really have something special. If somehow you have all three, then wow - this is most certainly worth your time and effort.

For example, an online game can be considered fun, perhaps interesting, but not useful. An online service like Google maps can be considered useful, perhaps interesting-ish but not fun. Wikipedia is interesting and useful. Ebay is useful. Youtube is fun and interesting. Brain training on the DS is fun and useful (well probably).

The trouble is that the majority of online projects (and this can certainly be applied to other areas) do not address any of these basic requirements. One area that is particularly guilty is online marketing. Quality, effective marketing is about clear communication, of informing the consumer of a product/service, detailed information about it, and its benefits. For example, the Apple site does a good job of providing a wealth of information about its products in a clear and concise way. Marketing should be, above all else, USEFUL. Its when people think it should be fun or interesting that it really fucks me off, because generally attempts at making marketing fun or interesting fail hideously and get in the way of the primary objective. If you can get it right, fair enough (for example, inclusion of perhaps a promotional film in a subsection of the main site) but how many times have I gone to a site to be presented with a “brand experience” when all I want to do is find out basic information about the product I want to buy. If you want to modify the objectives of your product beyond the core objectives, look at your plan and ask the questions again. If it is somehow less useful but no more fun or interesting, then its a bad move. This also applies to duplicating an existing useful product or service. For example, if you are to launch a marketing campaign, then no, you don’t need to create another myspace or facebook, unless you are going to make one that is actually better than the existing competition, otherwise its just not useful.

Another aspect that I find astounding is that so many companies still consider online activity to be primarily about marketing. For example, while I was working at SCEE, all online activity was directed by a subsection of the marketing department! You would think for a company attempting to move into a sphere of unified product, service, community, then online would be a true channel for a wealth of activities and that online would be an independent section of the company, but instead the overall vision was massively blinkered because decisions were being made in the context of marketing objectives for the company rather than based on whether the end result was useful, fun or interesting.

So, are those questions enough to measure the quality of something that you work on or create? I’m not sure. I might start reviewing things, ala an 80s video game mag or top trumps, with stars out of five for “FUN FACTOR”, “INTERESTING FACTOR” and erm.. “USEFUL POINTS”.

2 Comments

Leave a Comment

Username (required) :
Email (required) :
Web Site :
Comment :