UI again ...don't pretty up, destroy!

So the consumer/enterprise debate this weekend brought out many who think the way to fix enterprise software is to put a nice UI/social front end to it. There are lots of things wrong with enterprise software as readers of my blog know and SAP, Oracle and other vendors constantly do battle with me around but to me that is the least of our problems. 

We are going through a phase similar to 91-93. Back then people felt sorry for themselves for having to deal with green screens, when they wanted point and click. Today they question their manhood if their UI is not Ajax, Adobe Flash, Facebook enabled. Woe is me. Enterprise software vendors and CIOs just don't get it. How callous of them to let their users suffer.

Let's go back to good business process design principles. Capture data once - at source - in the most optimal digital format. Those 3 building blocks should apply when considering any UI re-design. So, Susan Scrupski has a good example. She is made to manually fill out her health claim forms. Someone at the insurer then probably scans them or manually enters  the data.  Instead of re-doing that internal system UI, the better solution would be to give users like her a direct interface. She has every incentive to get the data right, and enter it electronically. Even better would be to have her health care provider process the form electronically to the insurance company when she got the service. That would be capturing data once at the source and time of the trigger event.

I shake my head when I drop off my dry cleaning every week. The employees ask me my phone number and name every time and write it on a ticket in duplicate. Sometime during the day someone enters the ticket into a tracking system. Miraculously few clothes get lost in the 4 stores the owner has. Especially with a last name like mine. I have told him many times why not give me a customer card with a bar code on it and have his employees just scan it when I bring my clothes. That would be the most optimal data capture. Actually the most efficient would be to allow me to print a ticket at home or have a self-service kiosk at the store. I, more than any employee, have the incentive to get the ticket information right.

What's my point in all this? Someone in IT at Susan's insurer is probably working on a better UI for the clerk who enters her claim information. That is their solution to making that enterprise system "better". Somewhere at the software vendor which my dry cleaner uses, someone is working on a better user interface for his employees. Waste of money.

If we are going to re-do UI, let's not sex up the look and feel. Let's fix the business process it is part of. And that may mean destroying in many cases the UI for the non-value added intermediaries in the process...I know totally un-sexy...

Comments

[Kalki]

Having worked in the US Healthcare field for a few years, I guess I can say that it is easier said to move everything to a swanky UI.

I worked at a B2B start up that tried to link up the healthcare providers with the payers and given all the business rules that the payers had (each had a unique set of rules to suit its business), it was becoming a huge nightmare for us to map the provider data into the various payer data sets. We provided a swanky UI but the provider could talk to only a few payers (with whom we sucessfully integrated). And the claim submission worked like a charm. But the claim settlement and ERA transactions that follows claim submission was a totally different world.

Sometimes, I feel that a simple manual process is far better than high tech solutions. It may take longer, but it would cost less and will need little after-sales-service and maintenance.

Just my 2 cents.

[vinnie mirchandani]

Kalki, great point... every industry is similarly complex, otherwise we would have EDI formats for most common vertical transactions...

my point was to ensure we don't just Ajax a web 1.0 or green screen UI and call that "fixing the enterprise"...

[susan scrupski]

Hi Vinnie. It's unfortunate that a post that took about 10 minutes for me is getting so much attention (my debut on techmeme- sheesh!). What I've been trying to communicate in various comments around the blogosphere is not evolving to 1.0, but to 2.0, and yes a nice UI would be awesome.

With DIY 2.0, in a next-gen web-friendly enterprise world, from my company's site, I could self-select my provider based on, say what my "friends" recommend who does the best job in coverage. I could choose doctors based on who understands my particular maladies the best, based on patient reviews. This would all be drag and drop, AJAX goodness. My profile would already be input with my photo, record info, kids ss#s, etc. And- my ball point pen would be a relic encased in glass hanging above my desk. No, better-- I'd be auctioning it on eBay.

I realize there are issues on both sides of the equation. Enterprise apps vendors are getting this. We've seen positive moves taken this year from MISO. I've been blogging about this for months now, but we know this should not happen overnight for all the right reasons. Same for large enterprise IT. The introduction of consumer sexiness to the enterprise is coming-- but this "cluetrain" is more like a steam locomotive. It will get us to the same destination with all passengers intact; the kids may get impatient. It's up to explain to them why we're not "there yet."

[BryceJ (WR)]

As a UI designer my expertise is with identifying problems and suggesting solutions about user interface and user workflow. Any experienced interface or application designer will recognize that improvements are made on many fronts and that you can't solve business problems with only UI enhancements.

I do need to point out that when people like Nick Carr and myself talk about making applications friendlier and creating better User Experiences we are not talking about Look-and-Feel and AJAX widgets. We are talking about optimizing a system for Humans by identifying and targeting their needs.

I hope we can continue this discussion it has been a great one so far. I also admit that the only thing I know about EDI is what it stands for but I know that is something I should leave up to other experts.

[vinnie mirchandani]

Susan, unfortunately internal users have more clout than external users like you...they can put more internal pressure on the CIO. Software salespeople walk their halls etc. so their cries for prettier UI get heard when frankly they should not be in the business process at all, at least not for data entry

..if UI and business process was rethought from the consumer, supplier, etc backwards snd used latest pleasant looking web 2.0 that would be nirvana...

[vinnie mirchandani]

Bryce, thanks...see my comment to Susan...I am all for making UI much crisper so long as it meets the design principle of "Capture Data once at source in the most optimal digital format"...the reality is 80% of enterprise messaging is now between servers, devices and sensors, so while human to machine interface is extremely important lots more investment will be going in to what Sun calls the "Internet of things"

[Kalki]

Given the complicated business processes involved in enterprise applications space, it would be a huge effort for any software vendor to make the shift to a Web 2.0 based UI. In addition, we are talking about capturing data through various electronic means other than user entry of data. Yes - this is the direction that enterprise software is taking but you are probably a few years ahead of yourself. Even if we have the latest gadgetry in place today, it is going to be sometime before enterprises can effectively make use of it all.

The industry is clearly seeing one aspect happen in terms of technology - there is no major shift in how software is built. From the mainframe days to the client server days and now to the internet based platforms, it has not moved further away from that. It took less than a decade for client server to give way to the internet based platform. But we have not seen much happen beyond this. The only changes one may hope to see for sometime now would be the end user gadgets - mobile devices, RFID, Web 2.0 etc.

If software can reach a stage where it would not need an army of developers to customize it for a business' specific need, then we are talking about a technology shift. Till then, we would be harping about UI and more UI.

Again, this is just my 2 cents on technology as I see it.

[Jason]

"If we are going to re-do UI, let's not sex up the look and feel. Let's fix the business process it is part of."

SIR - The UI IS the business part of any enterprise application in the same way the stearing wheel is the business part of a car. If the stearing wheel is triangler then the car will not be driven if it's circular then driver take up will be much better.

The business part of any enterprise application is the USER and the way the user interacts with the application is via a UI. Make the UI better the application will shine and be used. An application with a poor UI is an application no one wants to use.

The architectural challenges vis-a-via integration, workflow, business process management, web service integration et al are pretty much sorted. Enterprise software vendors need to work on usable user interfaces to match the functionality of the architecture.

Also 'web20'izing' an application is not only restricted to the UI. There are many facets to consider and that's what we are working on at Mee-Mah.

Regards,

Jason
jason at mee-mah dot com

[vinnie mirchandani]

Jason - see my comment to susan above. Internal users are often the wrong users to focus on. If you can design UI for the optimal "data source" - usually outside the enterprise, fantastic. But internal users have more sway with the CIO and sw vendors - and frankly we should be getting many of them out of the data entry business

Kalki - that's depressing...but my sw tell me they are innovating with agile/scrum, rethinking testing with statistical applications of likely risk etc. Soem progress, but not enough...

[Stephen Collins]

Vinnie, thanks for the comment over at acidlabs. I'll respond to this post here, as it seems the best place (but cross-post it at acidlabs for continuity there).

In making enterprise apps more user centered, what I'm talking about is implementing a long, scientifically based, user centered process taking in elements of UI design, business process analysis, business precess reengineering and cultural change, all backed by strong HCI principles and human and organisational psychology. Using this process is something I discovered working with my colleague Matthew Hodgson (http://magia3e.wordpress.com). Before that, I was pretty successful doing the same thing, but much of my work was intuitive rather than scientific.
Taking a science-backed approach to user centered design on any application, let alone enterprise applications should lead to a better outcome for business and the users - internal and external. Design work and user consultation takes place across the entire development lifecycle, surprises are reduced in user land, decisions about interfaces can be made early and changed early (and cheaply) if need be.
Enterprise apps don't need to be "2.0", but given a significant proportion of users are now used to using applications that interact with them in that style (if there is a 2.0 style), we should be making the effort to adopt the best of what they are experiencing and put it into enterprise applications.

[Thomas Otter]

Vinnie,
Gosh, we may even be in agreement.
The best UI is no UI at all.

[Robert Johnson]

"So the consumer/enterprise debate this weekend brought out many who think the way to fix enterprise software is to put a nice UI/social front end to it. "

I'm frustrated at the lack of in-depth understanding of what's at stake in this discussion.

We have to quit listening to the 'Sex-It-Up', and Do-It-Cheaper' crowds if we're to avoid the inevitable catastrophes that happen when they're given their way.

There is a reason that Business software, let's say your Bank's, is un-sexy. It's because it's core purpose is to asssure secure, reliable financial transactions. Those who want a cheap, sexy system, should play games, that's where there are no real-life consequences for lack of security, or unreliable platform shortcomings.

The day my bank delivers a sexy interface on a Microsoft platform is the day I get another bank.

[Anshu Sharma]

Approved. Please forward this note to all my UI engineers.

As part of this re-design we will also be taking down the Deal Architect blog website and comments. You can receive posts directly in your RSS or Email client and send comments by email or voice.

:)

Anshu
(your new IT department)

[vinnie mirchandani]

Anshu, you missed the new goggles we are sending out to readers where the feeds show at the bottom...nudge youe head and it opens up the post - handy when driving

talk about going straight to the source and destination and cutting out intermediate UI.

..btw we have also develop this fancy new IP address to bank routing number table...every time you nudge your head it debits...

[vinnie mirchandani]

Robert, agree...btw - within banks there is a wide variety. I absolutely love Amex - you can even dispute charges on-line...try doing that with (with satisfactory results) with BofA...or Chase