At NerdHaven, the representative is typically a member of UX. Policy within UX is that if the completed work is your story, you showcase it. Which makes sense. The UXer wrote the story, they can describe what should happen, why the work was done, and if things get brutally technical, they can have a Dev or QA jump in to spell out the details.
I generally enjoy showcase - mostly because I enjoy explaining things, and (so long as I know the material) I'll talk to anyone. There's some AV hassle setting up a showcase (since a significant number of attendees are remote) but the procedure is known, and most of UX has it down pat.
We used to schedule a mini-meeting in the showcase room, for the 15 minutes immediately prior to showcase - just to get the webex setup and the conference call going. Eventually we got to the point where we could fly though setup given a minute or two.
Conference calls are horrid (everyone knows this) and we compound that by having part of our showcase be a video call with the west coast office alongside the webex/conference call. It's great to see the west coast folks when we talk, but it is an added complication.
Again, though - we've got the drill down pat.
- Fire up the webex in the non-chrome, non-IE browser (because chrome is wonky with our POS webex software, and because IE is our demo browser - if we crash it, the webex would die, too).
- Use the webex software to call the room (this saves us from having to punch in a long passcode on the room's cantankerous touchpad saucer.
- Mute our computer's speakers to avoid reverb
- Call the west coast on the video phone
- Launch IE and log into our demo environments
- Start recording the webex, pause it
- Wait until the royalty arrives
- Start recording
- Present our stuff
And we've tried to improve on our showcase. A lot of our audience is not getting our message. We've tested this. Dash took an informal survey of what we showcased and what people remembered and, well - folks were not getting a lot of what we said. Some are just touring the showcase, but some of those folks will need to support the features we demo-ed. If they don't get our message, we are doing things wrong.
Then there are the SMEs. Our SMEs are smart folks, but as I've said before - they live in a different universe than we do. UX is neck deep with Devs and QAs, and now we are Product, so we are up to date on what work is planned, and where it is at.
The SMEs are in the field, demoing features and helping clients set up our product. They have advanced degrees and are specialized experts in things folks like me cannot possibly understand. This is why we have them. When we are designing a feature for our clients (who often have the same advanced degrees) we need to lean on the SMEs to make sure we are not screwing things up with our non-SME ignorance.
The SMEs get this. UX gets this.
Sadly, this understanding is a one way street.
UX are designers, SMEs are not. And when I say designers, I don't mean detached "creatives" (a word I loathe beyond measure) - but designers in the Mike Monteiro "Design is a [Goddamn] Job" sense. UXers are paid to understand problems and design solutions for our end users. We are tasked with designing comprehensive, consistent designs that delight our customers. And we must do this in the Agile methodology (meaning no comprehensive redesigns, but improve what you touch - when you touch it). And do user research, and write requirements (as well as more and more business analysis).
The SMEs at NerdHaven have little patience for UX. We are in their way. I have mentioned this before - and I will keep mentioning it, I guess. Because right after I feel we are mending fences with the SMEs, we will have a meeting where they basically tell us that UX is entirely staffed with morons.
To give them their due, they have spent more time at NerdHaven than I have - and have had to deal with the likes of Noddy, the Professor, Ahh and Heater. Noddy has poisoned the well to an incredible degree - and my recent struggles with Arwafn has not improved things.
When Arwafn went over the cliff, Runner and I were suitably mortified - but the SMEs were out in the field with clients, trying to explain to them why the report was showing incorrect data. One of our SMEs - an incredibly sharp person I'll call Whitelake - has routinely pronounced Arwafn to be of limited value and perhaps something we should abandon.
The SMEs give the impression that if UX would just get out of the way, they could tell our Devs what to build and everything would be grand. They share the belief that our Devs just make things complicated and that an approach that "keeps it simple" would shorten timelines and result in more deliverables in a shorter amount of time.
The SMEs are smart people - but in this regard, they are completely wrong.
When Arwafn blew up, I remember the then-lead SME moving to ensure that future development would have greater SME oversight - sign-off, even. The thinking being that, had we greater SME involvement in Arwafn, the feature would have launched without problems.
But Arwafn's problems were deep, under-the-hood, data problems. SMEs are experts in their domain, but they are not data experts. They do not design databases, and they assuredly do not design user interface.
But they want to. And while I am not so much a UX snob to believe that the SMEs cannot help design good interface, they fall victim to the same fallacy that launched countless crappy user experiences. Designing screens is easy!
No. First, its not about designing screens - it's about discovering the actual problem the user wants to solve and designing a solution. A solution could be a screen - or it could be a phone number to call - or an incredibly complicated database-driven web application that synthesizes heaps of unseen data to present the one calculation the user cares about - when they care about it.
"I could tell you what the user needs in about 5 minutes. Here, I'll draw you a sketch..."
Being UX, you should always hear these kinds of comments out - but when they break down into "we get the right data and give it to our users, easy!" UXers like myself want to jump out a window.
Yes, I know we should show them the right data. Now, can you tell me how we distinguish from good data and bad data - so I can tell the Devs how to write their query?
And then... the handwaving begins - or references to data elements by their NerdHaven-given name, rather than the names of client-supplied data elements. Elements that should conform to a standard, but often don't.
Oh, we should use the date when event X happens? Do you realize that there are three different data elements that could have that information? Do you realize there is no way for us to look at those dates in those elements and know which of them is correct - if any? Do you realize that each client could use any of these elements - or one of their own devising? Do you understand that even if they send us the right data in the data element we expect, low level interface code could adulterate it or prevent our application from using it? Do you realize the amount of effort would be involved in getting a detailed picture of what our clients are sending and what is actually making it into our application - for even a single site?
I have been working to pin down an elusive bit of data, PofC and the forensic analysis has stretched into months. We've built new upstream processes, moved mountains and we're still barely there. Our solution for Arwafn's PofC problem will still only work for most of our clients. Not all.
Some of our SMEs are incredulous at this. "PofC is basic data, send to us in a DAT message. Don't you know how to read a DAT message? This is really very basic."
Yes, we know how to read a DAT. What we cannot read is the DAT message our clients don't send to us. Some clients only send us DAT messages half of the time. Does your 'basic' solution account for this? Are you aware that years of legacy code exists that parses DAT messages differently for different clients? Do you understand that they will send us DAT messages in parallel for the same record, forcing us to either guess which thread is the correct one, or merge the threads into a single thread? Each of these approaches has weaknesses, depending on the originating system (or systems). Do you have a recommendation for how we would approach this for all our clients, each of whom may have a different configuration?
We have explained this to the SMEs ad nauseum. Sometimes, it clearly has no effect. Other times, I see a nod of comprehension and resignation. But always, always, we seem to end up in the same place. The SMEs think we are fools for not grasping the simplicity of their solution. We are incompetent - bunglers.
I have personally explained to Ihaq the difficulties in solving the PofC problem. They seemed to get it - then later in showcase, they have asked why a (long abandoned approach to PofC) has not solved the issue so that this new work (that I am showcasing as completed dev work) is unnecessary. On the one hand, I should be happy that an explanation of our work from last year has been retained by a SME - yet I am frustrated that they had completely forgotten the in-person demo I'd given them less than two weeks ago.
And I know they are frustrated, too. Always, always - the feature work is incomplete. We'll address their concerns in a future story. They've heard this ad nauseum, too. They are sick of waiting. Every story we present is "the early version" or "for beta" so we can "refine it later." They know what they want - and we are just not getting it.
A particular sore spot with me was the printed output of Arwafn. UXDirector (way back when I first started) had flat out told me that we were not simply going to repeat what we'd done in the past. Namely, make the report output into a .CSV file. UXDirector's point was hammered home "we don't want to tell our clients that - in order to solve your data problem - the first thing to do, is to leave our application and open another program."
You could look at this a lot of different ways - but I took it as: the boss wants us to try new things. So, we talked with clients and found out what they wanted to do with Arwafn's output. They wanted modest editing, but nothing that required Excel - so we provided the ability to edit the view in Arwafn - and a PDF output that mirrored the view.
What we soon discovered, was that the client data was extensive enough to require a multiple page PDF output - which was universally unpopular. We intended to revise the approach so we would support all our client's data in two page-sized chunks - but before we did, all of our data issues blew up and we spent the next year fighting them. The SMEs were angry with the PDF, they wanted an Excel file output and could not believe we hadn't built one yet.
Now, we're rounding the bend on our data issues and the SMEs are back banging on the issue of the export to Excel. Being beaten up for a design choice I was driven into, then berated for not having fixed it by now is particularly galling. The SMEs think the PDF was some crazy "designers" idea. That it is in its final form - rather than the orphaned feature that it is.
I will ask to fix the PDF, but I am virtually certain that I will be told to make an Excel export instead. When this happens, the SMEs will nod their head and confirm each other's wisdom - and the work of the PDF export will be truly wasted. I beyond furious about this. There is no way to explain this to them - but I will keep trying.
This is UX.
* * *
Where was I?
Oh yeah, so I'm reviewing the few stories I have to do for the showcase that starts in an hour, when Red walks by.
"Did you realize that showcase is in BigLake?"
Uh....
BigLake is the largest meeting room we have and it has the worst video conferencing gear. I have had a series of catastrophic AV failures there, to the point where I have abandoned the room and made my remote attendees call into a new room. I hate BigLake. I had promised myself that I would set up a trial webex/vidcall with the west coast just so I can learn how the hell to make everything work when I don't have the entire company watching me. But there has not been time. Now, it will be trial by AV fire in BigLake.
But Red's not done. "They've changed all the AV gear in BigLake, too."
Uh...... sh!t?
I go immediately to Servicedesk and ask for the how-to for the new gear. Servicedesk is very precise, but it still learning the ropes themselves. They make a few things very clear:
- Don't touch anything on Remote #3 (there are, naturally, three remotes)
- There is a secret button on Remote #1 that makes the number buttons do what you'd expect them to
- There is special software to share your screen with the west coast office folks, but don't use it if you are doing webex, because it causes crippling lag
- We will not be able to video conference with the west coast, since the main line can only support the audio bridge call
These are not good things to learn 30 minutes before showcase, but I take note of them and thank Servicedesk, who then disappears into a puff of smoke.
BigLake's AV setup is VASTLY different. Where we used to have a desktop machine with a USB keyboard and some mic pads around the room - we now have a wireless ergo keyboard that connects to a completely invisible box whose only video display is the overhead projector that is either off, or currently receiving input from another source (guess which! such fun!) There's a wireless mouse (that lags incredibly) and no video cable to connect to if I want to use my machine. I will have to the room's machine. There's a TV for video calls. I power up the projector and - a minute or two later - I can see the faint projection of a Windows 7 screen. That I can deal with, so long as the phone hookup is working.
I test dial into the audio bridge and get it working - and watch the Window 7 screen projection on the wall get replaced by a bright blue field of nothing. There is a TV, which shows me the status of the outgoing call and soon I see the west coast office. But the room's computer display is still gone. I can't see what I'm doing on the box, and can't demo, or do anything.
F*&k.
Nugget walks in and I grab them, since they just worked this room with Red. Nugget immediately begins pressing the button on Remote #3 that Servicedesk said not to touch. The blue screen on the wall becomes a black screen with an input error message. Five minutes to showtime, folks are starting to come in and sit down.
F*&k-ity F*&k, F*&k...
Nugget then hangs up the phone. TV goes black and the projector, too. I grab Remote #3 and press the one button Servicedesk said we should mess with other than power - HDMI1. Which reconnects the overhead projector to the room's invisible PC.
I can see what I'm doing on the PC again. I start firing up Firefox to get the webex running and immediately realize that this machine has none of our bookmarks. All of our demo sites have incredibly convoluted URLs that I cannot remember (which is why I bookmarked them). The webex URL is pretty straightforward, so I fire it up-
-and am told that the invisible PC's version of Firefox needs a plugin to run the webex.
-which requires admin rights on the box.
-which I don't have.
Two minutes to showtime.
Chrome usually works for webex, but sometimes not - I go for IE (accepting the risk that we will crash IE in our demo and take out our webex).
Won't this be fun? Let's go.
IE fires up and (merciful God) does not need a plugin to use the webex. It's spooling up when the west coast calls us on the videophone-
-which turns the projected PC view back into a blue field of nothing. Sprint's on the videophone.
One minute...
I ask Sprint to bail out on the video call and dial the audio bridge until we sort our sh!t out over here. Sprint does so without a fuss - they know the drill, and they know we wouldn't ask if it didn't matter.
We get our projected PC back, the TV goes black and Sprint hails us over the bridge.
Sprint? They just get it done. Sprint is great.
I have the webex working and have fired up another tab to go to our demo site... and I can't remember the damn URL. I was hoping the prior showcase would have put it into our history, but-
I'll IM it from my machine!
But I can't because the invisible PC is a room PC and doesn't have IM, because: Bullsh!t. Some security jerkoff decided that a room can't be a user, so if you want to IM a room machine, you have to sign into the IM as yourself, then log out when you are done. As those are (naturally) separate credentials that you use exactly never (Button reads: "Remember-my-password-so-I-can-forget-it?" YES) I can't log into the IM.
Showtime!
Dash shows up. I like Dash, but they are habitually late in arriving to these things. They know their sh!t, and get it done, but as they are up first - with most of the demos - their late arrival is not helping. Sprint does the into over the bridge and asks if Dash is ready to go.
Dash says they are and the room projector flips to show the image of Dash's PC on their demo site. Dash is using the spiffy new software that came with the new AV gear and it's slick.
But wasn't there something that I'm supposed to remember about...?
Dash is partially into their first story when I realize the problem. Dash's PC is connected to the projector in BigLake (so we see it on our wall) and the projector in the big room in the west coast (which is not the room that Sprint and their team is in) but it is NOT connected to the webex at all.
So only the people in BigLake can see Dash's PC. I cut Dash off and ask if the remote callers can see the screen.
"No"
"No"
"No"
etc
I had the meeting over to Sprint, so they can go first now, while I get Dash up to speed on what they need to do: stop using the fancy room software and log into the epically sh!tty webex software we always use.
While they do that, Sprint is polishing of some solid demos because all Sprint knows how to do is get it the hell done. I'm realizing that I still don't have the demo URLs onto the invisible PC and I briefly think of doing what Dash is doing: use my machine to log into the webex, but - as if in answer - my laptop chose that moment to spontaneously switch itself completely off.
It had been doing that for a few weeks, usually within 30 minutes of undocking and Servicedesk was in the process of staging me a new machine, but y'know... as of now I'm just screwed.
I reboot my machine, and wait for the nastygram about not shutting it down properly.
Listen, bud - YOU shut you down improperly, don't go blaming me for your fail...
Sprint's wrapping up their stuff when it finally boots up. I use the invisible PCs awkward ergo-keyboard and laggy wireless mouse to set Dash up as a presenter (because Dash's webex account has never been promoted to Host or presenter).
Dash gets rolling. I call up my list of URLs and attempt to print them and -
I wish to GOD I was making this up- the nearest TWO printers are out of paper. So the room is treated to watching me walk in and out of the room not once, but twice.
I can't get the printout, and I don't dare risk using my "guess-when-I'll-switch-off" laptop. So, I'm stuck using the invisible PC with no bookmarks.
Great.
Dash finishes up and it's my turn. I have three things to demo, and each requires a separate demo site. Plus, if I'm going to reference the story cards, where I have all my notes, I need to log into our workflow webapp.
-Whose URL I have not failed to memorize.
I take a flyer at it hoping that the prior showcase used it, but no. The entire company is now watching a member of UX who apparently doesn't know where anything is - guessing at URLs they use every damned day (with bookmarks and history-autocomplete, neither of which this PC has).
With help from Nugget, I get into our workflow webapp and start showing the cards of the stories I will demo. I go into the first demo site and discover that I'd made a typo in my notes and find myself unable to log into the first demo site. When I try to refresh the page, I discover that the function keys are dual use and the standard function of F5 has been toggled off and the key now does some other (completely unhelpful thing). There is a toggle to regain normal function key behavior, but on this ergo-keyboard they (ha HA, creativity!) have placed it somewhere I cannot find.
Awesome!
To force the reload, I have to (laggy) mouse into the address bar and hit 'Enter' and plow forward like I just don't care. I muddle through the 1st story, but the ergo-keyboard makes me type like a drunk, and the wireless mouse (between sensitivity and lag) is like throwing darts at the app.
Click. Miss!
Click. Miss!
At some point, over the audio bridge, I hear music. It's the theme from Jeopardy.
Someone is playing the theme from Jeopardy. While I'm struggling to get through the demo, someone has decided that I am taking too long.
So they decided to play the theme from Jeopardy.
You know, for fun.
And I know exactly who it is. The same SME who mocked Ahhh when they were struggling in their showcase ages ago. It wasn't funny then, and I'm even less amused now.
I call them out. "I'm assuming that's you, Balin."
Balin fesses up. "Guilty as charged."
Most of our offices are watching, so I just say "Appreciate your input."
I finish my two other stories and wrap up. I'm absolutely livid and say so. I'm in Gumby's office venting about how utterly sh!tful it is to be mocked by a SME, to be made a fool of, when literally everything about the AV was falling down on my head. Gumby hears me out, although God knows why they put up with me.
It is - so far as I know, the first time I yell at work.
UX's relations with the SMEs has always been problematic, but really? This is where we have sunk to? Were the situation reversed and Balin was up there sweating out a demo, would anyone on UX razz them about it? Never.
I go off for far too long in Gumby's office and then seethe my way home. Gumby has tried to respond to any and all critiques of showcase and apparently the Dragon showcase was far worse than the one I was in. Gumby is looking to change things up and make improvements to the process, because that's the Gumby's answer to everything: more process.
Never mind what needs to happen is that we sort out our goddamn AV gear before this kind of crap happens again.
* * *
The next day, Balin emails me to apologize. They say they only meant to add a bit of levity to the meeting and were sorry to have upset me. Somebody has clearly asked them to contact me.
But it doesn't matter. I'm so glad to have an opening to explain where I was coming from. I cataloged the utter insanity of that day (in brief) so they would know why I wasn't laughing. I want them to understand - we are on the same team. I was having a bad day, a very bad day. I swore I'd be up for humor on any other day, but that day was not right time for me.
Balin was great about the whole thing. It was a great clearing of the air. The SMEs and UX will still be at loggerheads about a lot of things - but I want them to know we are people, we work hard, and we want NerdHaven to succeed. And that we believe the same about them.
We have to get past the animosity.
In a very weird way, the Jeopardy theme - and Balin's subsequent email - may represent a thawing of the ice.
