The incidental passenger

In previous posts, I discussed the phenomenon of the incidental user – incidental users are people who are not users in the traditional sense and they’re often overlooked in the design process of systems used to provide a service to customers. In the cases I mentioned so far, the incidental use scenario had to do with a computer monitor – but passengers riding in a car often fall into the same category. Some passengers are receiving a service in the traditional sense (e.g., taxis) but anyone who’s in a car, whether paying for the ride or not, is receiving a form of service (usually getting from one place to another).

Modern cars are increasingly loaded with systems that provide information and entertainment (also referred to as In-Vehicle Information Systems –IVIS). While both important and beneficial to drivers, these systems may distract them from their primary task (driving), but could be of benefit passengers. Currently, automobile dashboard design is heavily (and understandably) driver-focused – some of the information provided is necessary for purposes of driving, so the driver has to be able to see it. But how about sharing some of the information that’s already there with the passenger? GPSs show distance from the destination and other layers of information. What if passengers could know what they’re seeing out the window and approximately how much time or distance is left to their destination? Would it make passengers feel more involved in the trip and less bored? Would it help inspire trust or make the passenger feel a greater sense of control? Would it reduce driver distraction caused by passengers?

Below are examples of two dashboards’ design: The new Chrysler 200c concept car, with its iPhone-inspired user-interface, is an example for an interface that is clearly directed toward the driver, both in terms of visibility and in terms of control. On the other hand, the Mini’s dashboard central display, with its exceptionally large central speedometer (that is visible to both front and back seat passengers), makes the information transparent and sends a clear “I have nothing to hide” message to the passengers.

Chrysler 200cc concept car

Mini

Passengers of the Maybach luxury limousine, (who are being chauffeured) are presented with an extra speedometer in the passenger compartment, in addition to dials for time of day and outside temperature.

Maybach

Similarly, taxi passengers using Boston Cab’s Dispatch service are treated to “Passenger Information Monitors” that enable them to view details of the current trip: “The Passenger Information Monitor (PIM) provides the passenger with real-time mapping to track their journey. Passengers can choose to view maps at scales ranging from street level to regional, allowing passenger to view either their surrounding streets or a complete track of their journey.” (www.creativemobiletech.com/solutions/freedom.html).

Sharing information with these taxi passengers could reduce their need to directly interact with the driver and therefore reduce driver’s distraction and overcome possible language barriers, while improving their overall experience. It would be interesting to hear passengers’ reactions to the PIM and to see more automobile manufacturers adopt similar ideas in the future.

LCD Monitors make a difference

Just a few years ago, the vast majority of computer monitors were CRTs (cathode ray tubes). Today, LCD (liquid crystal display) monitors have almost completely replaced CRTs. People are giving away (or selling cheaply) their old, big and bulky monitors to make way for thin, sleek and higher resolution LCD monitors. Desks, which were planned in the past for huge CRT monitors, now have plenty of space available for other purposes.

Who could have considered working like this (with two monitors, one of them a 21” LCD) even just a few years ago, when LCD monitors were less common and still so expensive?

Simple issues of space and price now allow adding an additional screen for the customer or a larger screen that may also be visible to the customer. In the example below, the cashier’s monitor has been moved 270° from its traditional position and a new monitor has been added for the customer. The customer can see the items as they’re rung up, ask any questions and make sure the price she’s being charged are the same as the ones on the shelf.

Additionally, the much lighter monitors offer opportunities that weren’t available before. See these examples like multi-monitors or ceiling and back-to-back monitor mounts. Low cost and reduced space requirements allow service providers to place two or more monitors displaying the same information at different angles, so that people in a waiting room, for example, can view the information regardless of where they are in the room.

In the example below, McDonald’s has created a back-to-back display – the side we’re seeing is the customer side, where the customer is able to see the details of his order on the left side of the screen and an advertisement on the right.

Photo: Noam Tractinsky

I believe that, in the near future, we’ll begin seeing more and more back-to-back displays and other uses of LCD monitors that make it easier for the customer to see (at least some) information that the service provider has. This type of transparency may create new problems (e.g., privacy issues, questions about the information that is displayed, insistence to change an error) but in general, it will create a partnership between the customer and service provider and improve the overall service experience.

Going to the movies

Since I started exploring the idea of the Incidental User, I’ve become quite a nag (though Rachel, my wife, claims I’m usually very polite). When I’m in situations where I could be considered an incidental user I try to understand what information is being kept hidden from me, and why.

My latest exploration was when I took one of my kids to the movie theater. Waiting for his friend to arrive, I had a few minutes to spare and since I had nothing better to do I decided to check out the box-office. The first thing I noticed was the omnipresent monitor back-side, implying "you-can’t-see-what-I’m-doing".



So I approached one of the cashiers and asked what information appears in the hiding screen. The friendly cashier rotated the screen towards me to reveal two main screens: the first showing a list of the movies and the second showing a diagram of the theater for selecting the seats. As a movie-goer, the first screen really isn’t of much interest - only, perhaps, to make sure that I got tickets to the right movie - but I would obviously be interested in the seats I’m getting. In the existing interaction between me (the customer) and the cashier (sales representative) I’m unaware of the available seats and only if I specifically ask for an area in the theater, I might discover that it’s available and actually be sold tickets for those seats.

When I order tickets from home, I do get to choose the seats I want. In fact, I HAVE to choose the seats before I can close the order.



So, from being an active user when I’m at my home computer, I became a passive customer who isn’t able to choose seats or even be aware of the possibilities. This lack of transparency results in reduced trust - am I really getting the best seats? Now imagine that instead of looking at the back-side of the monitor, after telling the cashier what movie I want to see, I was able to see a monitor positioned in my direction, showing the map of seats - letting me say where I prefer to sit. Even if my choice turned out to be less than optimal, I would still feel I had more control over the situation.

What if the screen were presented like this?

Getting the Bus Repaired

Our 1998 VW Bus (aka Transporter or Caravelle), has periodically given us trouble with the minor detail of starting, especially in the morning…  Having recently replaced the battery, we knew that wasn’t the culprit. Some mechanics suggested that our infrequent use (a few times a week, mostly within the city) might be the cause – that perhaps a slow leak was repeatedly draining the battery.  Having repaired or removed anything that might be draining the battery, I began to suspect that it was more than that.
I jumpstarted the car (again) and drove it to a VW garage. A few hours later they informed me that the problem was a combination of the starter and the coil heater – and both had to be replaced. They estimated the cost at 2500NIS (roughly $600).

The next day, I came to pick the car and settle the bill. After a few minutes of the service representative typing on his keyboard, he announced that I needed to pay 2800NIS. When I asked for details he turned his monitor around to show them to me – a clear example of a poorly-designed service environment. Instead of understanding the needs of customers and designing displays accordingly, the service representative has no alternative but to share his display with the customer.

The screen I was presented with, beyond its 1980’s DOS look, was clearly designed for the service representative and not the customer. It included part numbers and various codes that I neither understood nor cared about. All I wanted to see was a short summary of the price of parts and labor. I can imagine an information kiosk at which a customer could not only view the details of his bill without being confused by codes, but also learn a bit about mechanical issues – how about presenting, on demand, a picture of the items that were replaced and their location in the car? Or perhaps even a short video with a brief explanation of the system involved…

Yearly car inspection

A few days ago I took my aging car (1998) for its yearly inspection. For those of you who aren’t familiar with such inspections (particularly in certain countries in the Middle East…) let me just tell that it’s probably one of the least pleasant experiences one could have (except, perhaps, a root canal).

It starts with the pressure of not knowing whether you’ll pass or what you might have to fix in your car (and how much it will cost) to make you pass. In addition, you’ve got the pressure of following vague instructions (“Forward! Now stop! Neutral! Foot on!”) shouted out by the testers, who seem to be intent on showing off their authority by speaking in their own lingo to you, in a noisy environment (other cars, other testers) and then being visibly angry at you for not getting it right…

One exciting part of the inspection is an emission test performed with a dedicated device. The monitor is actually facing the driver (you can see I shot this out of my car window), bad lighting conditions and all...

Here's a close-up of the device on the left, displaying digits that are meaningless to the average person (and actually, like in this picture, only one of the tests seemed to be active):

As with other incidental-user situations, this device is intended for the person performing the test. However, the screen, being directly exposed to me (i.e. car owner acting as an incidental user) naturally grabbed my attention. I watched it worriedly, trying to guess how my car (and consequently my bank account) was doing by watching unfamiliar abbreviations and numbers, while following orders from the tester (“keep the engine at 2500rpm” etc). I was also trying to figure out the color coding (guessing that red is bad and green is good?) and the meaning of the numbers – I assumed that lower figures were better (lower numbers = lower emission). I was awakened from my reverie with the “Go! Move your car!” command fired at me by the tester. No indication on the screen of the device told me if the car had passed or failed, so I had to explicitly ask him, and hey – it passed with flying colors (actually green, in this case).

One way of taking the incidental user into consideration in this situation is adding another (bigger) screen positioned toward the customer, in addition to the existing screen (which would display more technical information). The customer screen would present only basic information (e.g. what is being checked right now, the results and a pass/fail message). Alternatively, the existing display could be made more understandable by using better terminology and clearer messages. The entire experience might be improved by providing customers with a ‘cheat sheet’ of the inspection process, including step-by-step explanations that would make the inspectors instructions less cryptic.

Welcome!

There's something that's been on my mind for a while...

During the 10 years before I started studying toward my PhD, I did over 100 projects that involved designing user interface for software and systems. One project in particular - Lumenis One - got me (and my partner, now also my wife) thinking about what we could do to not only make the system easy for the doctor to operate, but simultaneously make the treatment more pleasant for the patient. Although, in the past, there had been projects in which I planned, say, a bright red alarm in the top right of the screen so the supervisor could see it over the operator's shoulder, this was the first time I really considered someone who was very definitely an interested party, but wouldn't actually be using the system.

As part of the design process, we visited clinics and watched doctors perform treatments. We noted the distance between the bed and the device, the lighting conditions and angle. We interviewed a doctor and patient about what the main fears are when having such a treatment and we worked to design screens that made the patients feel confident that their treatment was exactly as it should be, in addition, of course, to supporting the needs of the doctors.


As time went on, I noticed more and more cases of this passive type of interaction with systems - the checkout at the supermarket, the yearly auto inspection, visits to the doctor, etc. It seemed as if all these systems could offer more if they could somehow take people like me, who weren't actively using the system, into consideration.

At the CHI conference last year, I started to discuss this with Noam Tractinsky, one of my advisors, and we started to further develop the idea, describing the phenomenon and determining its place, as part of the Services Science field. We threw around various names and finally settled on "the incidental user" as being the most appropriate.

We're now at the point where we feel we've adequately defined the phenomenon and are taking steps to define its various aspects. Noam and I welcome any examples you may have and any questions on the topic.