求是设计会

译前简介：

       原文来自于交互设计之父Alan Cooper09年的一次演讲。后敏捷运动领导人Dave Hussman在09年举行了一场单日会议——“敏捷重设计”，Cooper受邀做了这个大会演讲“一场优质的变乱（An Insurgency of Quality）”。08年IxDA交互大会上，Alan Cooper就做了同名演讲。此次，Alan Cooper对其进行了完善。大家可以在Alan Cooper咨询公司的官网日志上浏览原文演讲稿。

       《An Insurgency of Quality》直译为“变乱的高标准”可能更合适，不过我想翻译成《一场优质的变乱》可能更符合中国人的语言习惯。这是一场由敏捷开发带来的，关于项目流程的变乱。

       此文将向您详细讲述一个交互设计师，或者说一个用户体验从业人员，其职责究竟是哪些。看完此文，也许你会对你的工作产生新的看法，也许你会对你的团队协作产生更多的看法。

（由于演讲较长，所以将35个章节分为上下两部分，前15章为上半部分，主要介绍了敏捷开发的现状，设计与开发中的术语，跨专业合作中的问题，技术与管理间的矛盾。而后20章为下半部分，将再深入讲述交互设计与开发如何通力协作，并如何更好的管理项目，实现让用户满意的产品。）

       以下内容来自Alan Cooper咨询公司的官网，由沈浩翔翻译完成，沈浩翔校对。 版权声明：文章英文原版版权归原作者所有，译文版权归原作者和求是设计会共同拥有，转载时请以超链接形式标明文章原始出处和作者信息。

1.Introduction介绍

       My name is Alan Cooper. As a pioneering independent software developer since 1975, I’ve written lots of code and created several successful applications. Many of you know me as the “Father of Visual Basic”. I invented much of the underlying technology of Microsoft’s software development tool and sold it to Bill Gates in the late 1980s.

       我是Alan Cooper。从1975年开始，作为一个独立软件开发先驱，我写了很多代码，并创造出了好几个成功的应用。因“VB之父”的称号，而被大家所熟知。我为微软软件开发工具创造了很多底层技术，并在20世纪80年代末期卖给了Bill Gates。

       In 1992, I founded what was arguably the first consulting interaction design company. Over the last 17 years, we’ve worked with literally hundreds of companies, large and small, on products of every conceivable variety. Located in San Francisco, Cooper continues every day to tell the user’s story to practitioners and business people in a useful and actionable way.

       1992年，我创立了饱受争议的第一家交互设计咨询公司。在过去的17年里，我们专注于产品的各种可能性，和大大小小的上百家公司进行了合作。在圣·弗朗西斯科，Cooper咨询公司坚持用一种有用并有效的方式，向业务人员和从业人员讲述各种用户故事。

       I’ve made several significant contributions to the field of design. Many of you have used my invention, design personas. My books, including The Inmates are Running the Asylum, have helped to define a rigorous discipline of software design.

       这让我在设计领域做出了几项有重大意义的贡献。你们之中很多人都用过我的发明，如设计人物角色模型。我的书，包括《跑出精神病院》，定义了严谨的准则去实践软件设计。

       For the last two years I’ve focused my attention on the growth and success of agile development methods. There is nothing in the history of software quite as significant as the agile revolution. While I’m thrilled by the awesome potential of this new way of thinking, I remain aware that most revolutions in history have been co-opted and have failed to live up to their potential.

       最近两年我的注意力集中在敏捷开发的迅猛发展和成功上。在软件历史上，没有像敏捷开发革命这么意义重大的事情了。这种全新思考方式的惊人潜力让我深感震惊。但我仍然意识到，历史上大多数革命都被孤立，然后在还没来得及展现潜力前就倒下了。

2.We are here to celebrate our success  我们在此为我们的成功弹冠相庆

       We are here today to celebrate the success of agile development. The craft of agile has clearly demonstrated its immense power to enhance software development. It has proven its ability to deliver better quality software, in far less time, and with happier teams. Similarly, the craft of interaction design has demonstrated great power to enhance the quality of the software user’s experience. Skillfully applied, interaction design can also speed the delivery of better quality software, in less time, with happier teams.

       我们今天之所以在此是为了庆祝敏捷开发的成功。敏捷开发的技术已经清楚的展示了敏捷在软件开发中的强大力量。敏捷开发的开发团队往往更快乐，而且已经被证明了能在更短的时间内开发出高质量软件。同样的，交互设计的技术在增强用户体验，提高软件质量上展现了强大的力量。加以巧妙的应用。交互设计也能让团队更快乐，在更短的时间内提供更高质量的软件。

3.We are here to make mid-course corrections  我们在此做期中总结

       We are also here to consider what mid-course corrections would improve the results of our work. Today’s search for betterment is in no way a criticism of our existing practices, and any apparent disapproval you may hear is simply me grappling with the big problem of more effectively integrating two groups of equally intelligent, headstrong practitioners.

       我们在此思考下，这个期中总结如何改进我们的成果。今天我们追寻的改进决不是批评我们已有的工作；任何你听到的刺耳的批评，只要通过我们的努力，将两群人（敏捷开发者和交互设计师）的智慧有效的整合在一起，就一定能解决，让我们放手去干吧。

4.Terminology wrestling  盘根错节的术语

       An unfortunate footnote to all of this success is the constant wrestling with terminology, titles, and practices in both the design and agile worlds. Agilists argue interminably; about the differences between agile coaching and Scrum Mastering; which is better, Scrum or XP? Or whether you are really agile if you don’t pair program.

       不管在设计领域还是敏捷领域，现有的一切成功都有一个不幸的注脚——始终盘根错节的术语、头衔、实践。敏捷开发者没完没了的争吵，关于敏捷的训练和Scrum冲刺的控制之间的不同，哪个更好，Scrum开发还是极限开发（XP）？或者假如你不按常规你是否就是真正的敏捷开发了。

       Designers argue endlessly about the differences between User Experience Designers and Interaction Designers; which is better, contextual enquiry or goal-directed design? Or whether personas are real or just made up.

       设计师们也争论不休，是用户体验设计师还是交互设计师；情境调查还是以目标为导向的设计，哪个更好；角色模型应该是真人还是虚构的。

       Like all of you, I have a position in these battles. I’m in support of what works best.

       和你们一样，我也有自己的立场。白猫黑猫抓住老鼠的就是好猫。

       In the design world, I have seen a clear difference between those design practices that are craft-based and those that are art-based. The latter is based on someone’s opinion, while the former is based on the demonstrable improvement in the actual end user’s experience.

       在设计领域，我看到了以技术为基础的设计和以艺术为基础的设计的显著不同。后者以某人的观点为准，而前者以可证实的实际最终用户的体验改进为准。

       As in all crafts, there exists a broad collection of skills and techniques, and the craftsman uses the appropriate subset to solve the problem at hand. It isn’t about style or authority and it isn’t about ego; it’s about synthesizing the correct solution. For over 15 years I have used the term “interaction design” to describe authentic craft-based design, and that is the term I will use in this talk to differentiate it from other, less effective forms of design.

       所有技能都一样，现在已经有很广的一套技术和技巧的合集，技术人员选择其中适当的一些技术和技巧来解决手头的问题。这和风格或权威无关，也和自尊无关；这只和整合出一个正确的解决方案相关。我使用“交互设计”这个术语超过15年了，我用其描述以技术为基础的设计。在这个演讲中，我将把它和其他低效的设计形式区分开来。

       This is not to say that what someone calls “experience design” isn’t an effective craft-based method. You say potayto and I say potahto. It’s just that there are many practitioners who, although they have the right words, they lack the fundamental imperative of all agile, craft-based methods: the success of the end-user.

       这不是像某些人所说的，“体验设计”不是一种有效的技术为基础的方法。你说的体验设计，和我说的交互设计，其实说的是同一个东西。（某些人说体验设计低效）只是因为有很多新人，虽然他们知道正确的单词，但他们缺乏所有关于敏捷、以技术为基础的方法的至关重要的东西：让最终用户成功。

5.Not process for process’ sake  不要为流程而走流程

       Agile’s success comes from its ideals more so than from its practices. Our focus cannot be about process for process’s sake.

       敏捷开发的成功不仅仅来自于想象，也来自于实践。我们的注意力不要放在为流程而走流程。

       Over the last decade, several groups of developers independently derived the basic practices of what we know today as agile. These methods showed promise, but weren’t yet a coherent approach.

       在过去的十年中，几股互不相干的开发者团队，衍生出了我们现在所知的敏捷开发的基础实践。这些方法展现出了希望，但还没有形成一套脉络清晰的方法论。

       The explosive success of agile only came when a cadre of responsible craftsmen came together and stated that their goal was to build products that made the end user more successful.

       只有在有责任心的核心技术人员聚在一起，拥有相同的产品设计理想——让用户用的更爽——这样的情况下，敏捷开发才会展现出爆炸性的成功。

6.Responsible craftsmanship  技术责任感

       The Agile Manifesto states that “Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer”. The document clearly communicates that while agilists care about individual success, they care more about product success. Interaction designers agree with these principles completely. I call this attitude “responsible craftsmanship”.

       敏捷开发宣言声明：“满足客户是我们最优先考虑的事。”这份文档清晰的传达了这样的观点：虽然敏捷开发者关心个人成功，但他们更关心产品的成功。交互设计师完全赞成这样的宗旨。我将此称为技术责任感。

       But software design and development don’t live in the world of potters and painters, cabinet makers and blacksmiths. We live in the world of fast-paced, big money, high technology business. And business hasn’t had to deal with craft on this scale since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

       软件的设计和开发，与陶艺家、画家、橱柜制造者和铁匠不在同一个世界。我们生活在一个处理快节奏，高投资，搞技术的业务的世界里。我们的业务不触及工业革命带来的那些技术。

7.A struggle for power  权力斗争

       Over the years, when interaction designers ask me which design technique works best, I have assured them that this is not so much a battle of technique as it is a struggle for power. The same holds true today as we, the responsible craftsmen, wrestle power away from those people who insist on living in the past.

       很多年来，当交互设计师们问我设计和技术哪个更重要，我可以很明确的告诉大家，这不是一场技术斗争，这是一场权力斗争。这在现在依然如此，在我们这些有责任感的技术人员与坚持老旧开发方式的人角力，争取权力的时候依然如此。

       There is a similar power struggle in the agile world today. Many of the recent converts to agile are merely going through the motions, but are not truly committed to the ideals of agile. Lots of developers paper their walls with post-its, iterate rapidly, and have stand-up meetings, but like skateboarders who wear Van’s and read Thrasher but never actually get on a skateboard, these people are poseurs.

       现今的敏捷开发的世界同样存在相似的权力斗争。很多最近转型到敏捷开发的人，只不过在精神上表示支持，并没有真正的投身到敏捷开发的理想中来。很多开发者，通过发表观点，快速的重复，开持久的会议来包装自己。这就和那些穿着前卫，嚼着成功者的舌根，但从未踏上滑板的滑雪者一样。都是一群装腔作势的人。

       The recent “Agile Roots” conference in SLC was an attempt to highlight this difference and return to the quality ideal. Similarly, the emphasis of today’s conference is a reassessment of agile to determine what’s real and what is mere posing.

       最近在盐湖城举行的“敏捷之根”会议，凸显了这种分歧，并试着回归到高质量理想中来。同样，今天的会议索要强调的，是重新评价敏捷开发，将那些真正的实践者和装腔作势的人划分开来。

8.Agile comes from programmers  敏捷来自于工程师

       Agile evolved in its own universe of programmers, invented by programmers, and centered on code. Better, more responsive code is a good thing, but it isn’t the only thing. Arguably, the greatest strength of agile stems from its emphasis on collaboration with other disciplines.

       敏捷来自于工程师的体系，被工程师发明出来，并以代码为中心。更恰当的说，更多灵活的代码是好事，但不是唯一的事。有趣的是，敏捷最强大的力量来自于它与其他准则的协同配合的重要意义。

       While this emphasis on collaboration is new to programming, its value is immediately apparent to agilists.

       对于程序员来说，协作的重要性是件新事，其价值迅速的在敏捷开发者中体现了出来。

       Collaboration insures that the critical initial steps in software development are gently guided down more appropriate paths, resulting in multiplicative benefits as the project proceeds. Even rudimentary collaboration between relatively inexperienced practitioners yields significant benefits. But collaboration between disciplines is a tougher problem than collaborating within a discipline.

       协作确保了软件开发的起步阶段，平滑过渡到合适的开发途径，为项目实施带来了多重好处。甚至在相对没经验的菜鸟的基本协作下，产生了明显的好处。但是与单一标准相比，多重标准的协作是个难题。

9.Collaboration  协作

       Ironically, the very success of agile collaboration can blind its adherents to the scale of the problem: there is collaboration where there was none before, and then there is skilled, trained, effective collaboration between mutually experienced craftsmen.

       具有讽刺意味的是，敏捷开发协作的成功遮蔽了拥护者的眼睛，人们忽视了问题的范围：有种以前从未有过的协作，即富有经验的技术人员之间有技巧的，受过训练的，有效的协作。

       I am not criticizing collaboration when I say that most agile practitioners (and most interaction designers, for that matter) have yet to engage in high-quality collaboration.

       当我说这些的时候，我不是在批评协作。大部分敏捷开发从业人员（包括大部分交互设计师等）还没有投身到高质量的协作中来。

       Probably the weakest link in the agile chain is the part where developers work with customers, users, marketers, analysts, and subject-matter-experts to determine what the software should do and how it should behave.

       在敏捷开发链中最薄弱的环节，可能就是这个环节：开发者和客户、用户、市场人员、分析人员、领域专家探讨决定软件应该是如何，应该如何展现的。

       Often, when agilists give these stakeholders just what they ask for, they still don’t create a successful product.

       通常，当敏捷开发者给涉众想要的东西，他们仍然没有创造出成功的产品。

       Part of the problem lies in the sad truth that these other disciplines are similarly isolated and internally focused on their own particular specialty which keeps them from understanding the software side of the problem.

       有些问题横亘在这令人沮丧的事实之中。其他准则往往独立，并关注于它们各自领域的东西，阻止了他们去理解软件方面的问题。

       My personal 35-year long software odyssey has made abundantly clear to me that the task of satisfying the user can only be achieved by fully integrating both the development and the interaction design practitioners into a single, self-organizing, self-directed team.

       我35年的软件开发经历让我十分明白，只有将开发者和交互设计师完全整合起来，合而为一，作为一个自我组织，自我导向的统一团队才能实现目标，让用户满意。

       This means that those agile enthusiasts who believe that all other disciplines, including interaction design, need to march to the agile drummer are thinking too narrowly. The two disciplines won’t integrate on one discipline’s turf. They will unite on some common ground, slightly new to both of them.

       这意味着，那些敏捷开发热衷者，相信所有其他准则，包括交互设计领域的准则都将融合到敏捷开发准则的敏捷开发热衷者，太狭隘了。这两种准则不会整合成一个准则。它们会在一些更新，更通用的背景下结合在一起。

10.Smaller difference  更小的差别

       But don’t despair; the difference is smaller than you might think. Interaction designers have been using agile methods (under other names) for years. Interaction designers have always designed in pairs, have always rapidly iterated in a discardable medium, have constantly refactored their work, always begin with a fuzzy, out of focus, yet complete image of the final product, always are open to outside advice, suggestion, and direction, and have always judged that advice on its merit, not on the authority of its source.

       但不要绝望，差异其实比你想象的小得多。交互设计师使用敏捷开发的方法（但用了其他的名字）很多年了。交互设计师总是成对的设计，总是快速在中间交付物中迭代，总是不断的重构他们的工作，总是在最终产品的未完成形态、模糊形态、没有焦点的状态中开始工作，总是开放的听取外人的建议和指导，也总是判断这些建议的优点，而不迷信建议来源的权威性。

11.IxD is the developer’s best friend  交互设计是程序员的最佳伙伴

       I believe that interaction design should be the developer’s best friend, and an integral part of the agile team. Their common goals and values make this inevitable.

       我相信交互设计应该是程序员最好的伙伴，是敏捷团队的重要组成部分。他们的通用目标和价值让这不可避免。

       Most of the other disciplines that developers need to collaborate with don’t share the responsible craftsman’s concern for product success and quality.

       大部分需要程序员合作的其他法则，并不能为技术人员分担责任，不能分担技术人员对产品质量和产品成功的担心。

       Typically people in roles such as “business analyst”, “database administrator”, “documentation writer”, “chief executive officer”, “graphic designer”, “project manager”, or “code librarian” don’t have the big view in mind.

       那些扮演着“业务分析”、“数据库管理员”、“文档撰写者”、“首席执行官”、“视觉设计师”、“产品经理”、或“代码库管理员”的人们，心中并没有产品的全景。

12.Problematic collaborationists  出问题的合作者

       This is not a condemnation of these people—frequently they care deeply and feel hamstrung by their inability to do the right thing.Most people are merely stymied by their job limitations—they are way too busy doing the rest of their job, or their discipline hasn’t sufficiently evolved to address the broader goal of customer satisfaction. Often the sheer size of their other responsibilities forces them to assess all software design and programming activities as “merely technical” and this blinds them to the vital strategic nature of how their software behaves.

       这不是指责这些人——这些人常常忧心忡忡，对自己无力做正确的事懊恼不已。大部分人仅仅被他们的工作限制住——他们总是忙于他们的工作，或者他们的工作准则还没有得到充足的发展，让他们去表达让客户满意的更广泛的目标。通常，他们负责的其他事务的艰难程度，逼迫他们“仅仅从技术角度”去评估软件设计和开发的方方面面，这妨碍了他们去思考他们的软件应该如何交互的重要策略问题。

       While pursuing their own careers, they can inadvertently obstruct the development process. Even if they are willing to collaborate, they might do so only on their own terms.

       当他们在追求自己的职业生涯发展的时候，他们不自觉的阻碍了开发过程。仅管他们愿意协作，但他们还是只用自己的术语工作。

       Interaction designers can be the developer’s most effective collaborator. This is not true of all those who call themselves “designer”. In fact, their willingness to collaborate effectively is an excellent litmus test of their authenticity.

       交互设计师可以作为程序员最有效的合作者。当然，这并不是对所有自称“设计师”的人而言的。事实上，是否积极主动的有效合作，是判断他们是否是货真价实的设计师的试金石。

       A true interaction designer places the user’s satisfaction at the forefront; a true interaction designer isn’t too busy with “their” job to work hand-in-hand with developers; a true interaction designer is willing to collaborate on the developer’s terms; and a true interaction designer discusses the trade-offs and participates in the difficult decision making instead of issuing directives to the programmer.

       真正的交互设计师将用户满意度放在首位；真正的交互设计师并不忙于做“他们自己”的工作，他们会和程序员齐头并进；真正的交互设计师愿意用程序员的术语来写作；真正的交互设计师权衡并参与到做困难决策的事情上，而不是放话去指挥程序员。

13.White collar， Blue collar & No collar  白领、蓝领和无领

       Probably the most troublesome group of necessary collaborationists is business management. Very few managers have any skill or interest in software development. All of them are too busy and far too preoccupied with things that they deem more important than software development.

       可能最难合作却不得不合作的人，就是那些管理者了。很少有管理者有技术或者对软件开发感兴趣。他们总是很忙，而且被他们认为更重要的事情占满了。

       Most of them are stuck in the industrial age paradigm, where managers are white-collar, smart, well-educated, and responsible for deciding on the proper course of action, while practitioners are blue-collar, poorly-educated, and incapable of making informed decisions.

       他们中大部分还坚守在工业时代的模式中：管理者是白领，聪明，受过良好教育，对执行过程中的决定负责；参与者是蓝领，缺乏教育，不能做足够正式的决定。

       Today, in the post-industrial age, “no-collar” knowledge workers are typically better educated, equally intelligent, and better able to make informed decisions than any manager is. Worst of all, managers insist on managing; they restrict resources unnecessarily, issue ill-considered directives, and let their guesses preempt the work of the expert practitioners.

       今天，在这后工业时代，“无领”知识工作者是典型的比管理者受过更好教育，拥有和管理者相当智力，比管理者更善于做非正式决定的人。最糟糕的是，管理者坚持管理；他们不必要的束缚资源，发布不妥当的命令，用他们的猜测来指挥专业技术人员的工作。

       After years of trying to reason with managers, I finally came to realize that the true power lay in the hands of practitioners; of responsible craftsmen; of us.

       经过多年与管理者讲理的尝试，我最终认识到，真正的力量掌握在专业技术人员手里，在有责任感的技术人员手里，在我们手里。

14.Responsible craftsmen  可靠的技术人员

       I am now convinced that we are engaged in an insurgent war, and that responsible craftsmen are the only constituent that can honestly see the problem and the solution, and that we will fight for the greater good, rather than merely for our own, short-term career goals.

       我现在深信，我们正在进行一场变乱的战争，有责任感的技术人员是唯一的要素，唯一能真正发现问题并解决问题的人，我们牺牲小我完成大我，而不仅仅是为了自己，不仅是目光短浅的为了实现职业生涯目标。

       At the turn of the millennium, software developers in this country were in a bad way. Their basic methodology and approach to development was rooted in academia or old-skool companies like Microsoft. Their methods worked, but they were also guaranteed to take a long time and produce unlovable, unusable products.

       在千禧年的转折点上，这个国家的软件开发者处于困境。他们开发的基本方法和途径来自于学校或像微软一样的古板企业。他们的方法有效，但是这也保证了他们在一个相当长的时间内产出了糟糕的没用的产品。

       The booming open source movement was clear evidence that developers were unhappy at their day jobs. And those jobs were drying up, being outsourced to Bangalore, Talinn, and Chengdu. Communications within the development community were good, but dialog with the business and design communities was weak.

       开源运动的爆发清晰的程序员们为他们的日常工作感到不快。这些工作枯燥，被外包给了班加罗尔（在印度），塔林（爱沙尼亚共和国首都，原名日内瓦，在波罗的海岸边）还有成都。开发者社区的交流不错，但和业务或设计社区的人交流则很弱。

       While I have no proof, I simply can’t credit the rapid ascent of agile to anything other than a collective sense shared by the software intelligentsia that, being at a professional nadir, there was nothing to lose by gambling everything on agile’s radically new vision.

       虽然我没有证据，我不能简单的相信敏捷开发会在专业的天空下的快速崛起，但这是来自软件知识分子的共识。我们一无所有，可以孤注一掷的投身到将敏捷开发激进的新景象中去。

       Coincidentally and concurrently, I was arriving at a similar state of frustration in my attempts to convince business executives that they needed to pay more and better attention to their software development efforts. I struggled to explain that software wasn’t some technical backwater of the corporation, the way it might have been when punched cards walked the earth.

       同时，我尝试说服商人，告诉他们需要花更多钱和注意力在软件开发上，我正倍受挫折。我争辩，软件技术不是公司的技术壁垒，这种方式已经过时了，壁垒正在被打破，技术在走向世界。

15.Peter Drucker: management guru  Peter Drucker：管理大师

       Ironically, reading the words of one of the greatest business management thinkers, Peter Drucker, gave me the courage to finally turn my attention from business executives to focus instead on practitioners as the true source of power in the modern company. Drucker presciently foresaw the rise of the knowledge worker and the growing ineffectiveness of conventional management.

       具有讽刺意味的是，阅读最伟大的商业管理思考者之一——Peter Drucker（皮特尔·德鲁克，《卓有成效的管理者》等书的作者）的文章，给了我鼓励，最终让我将注意力从商业执行上，转向将技术人员作为现代公司的真正源力上来。Drucker很有先见之明的预见到了知识工作者的增加，而传统的常规管理方法正在变得无效。

（未完待续）

题外话：

       译者认为国内设计从业人员、IT从业人员，往往过多关注于经验和最佳实践；而美国人则更愿意一边实践，一边抽象出一套完备有逻辑的理论，并通过理论，构建平台，创建协议。之后，再通过具体项目的需求，将理论裁剪成适合自己产品的模型，从而高效高质量的完成项目。而信息革命以来，所有重大的科学成果，以及先进的产品几乎都来自于北美；而国人则认为这些理论化的东西过于枯燥。

       然而，没有理论支撑的设计，往往起于灵感，失于感觉。前辈无法准确有效的传达其设计精髓，后辈学习设计往往缺乏引导，只能靠“悟”，这样的设计环境太缺乏传承。译者希望能通过翻译国外最前沿的知识，给国内从业人员更多的触动和启发。希望通过翻译，中国设计师在未来不仅能说明自己的设计，也能证明自己的设计。