{"id":15522,"date":"2018-07-04T12:14:55","date_gmt":"2018-07-04T11:14:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/marvel7077.wpengine.com\/?p=15522"},"modified":"2021-01-17T23:44:57","modified_gmt":"2021-01-17T23:44:57","slug":"6-common-pitfalls-prototyping","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shopjessicabuckley.com\/blog\/6-common-pitfalls-prototyping\/","title":{"rendered":"Six Common Pitfalls When Prototyping"},"content":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s hard to imagine a modern product design process without prototyping and testing. By following a technique<\/p>\n

<\/div>
<\/svg><\/div>

\"Show, don\u2019t\u00a0tell.\"<\/p><\/span><\/blockquote>\n

Many product teams use prototypes today to sell or test ideas. At the same time, quite often product teams fall into traps that reduce the effectiveness of their prototyping efforts. Here are six of the most common pitfalls.<\/p>\n

Prototyping without a\u00a0purpose<\/h2>\n

\u2018Let\u2019s create something first; we\u2019ll figure out what to do with it later.\u2019 <\/em><\/p>\n

By following such an approach, product teams can spend a lot of time working on something that doesn\u2019t bring any value. Creating prototypes without a specific purpose often results in a great waste of time.<\/p>\n

Each prototype should be created for a reason. That reason might be explaining a specific idea or validating a hypothesis. When a product team knows the reason, this knowledge helps build a prototype that matches that purpose.<\/p>\n

Before creating a prototype, designers should ask themselves, \u201cWhat problem do I try to solve by creating this prototype?\u201d Finding a clear answer to this question will make prototyping more focused and help to prevent potential overheads.<\/p>\n

Focus on creating something that\u00a0works<\/h2>\n

Product teams often think that the goal of prototyping is creating something that works. Teams feel discouraged when their prototypes fail. This negative state of mind can inhibit the whole design progress.<\/p>\n

To be productive, designers should take the idea of failure as a natural part of the prototyping process. Prototypes are meant to test assumptions, and not every assumption will be valid. That\u2019s why creating working prototype shouldn\u2019t be the most important outcome of a prototyping effort. The most important outcome of a prototyping effort should be new knowledge. Thus, shift the focus from the idea of failure into the idea of learning. Both successful and failed prototypes allow you to learn.<\/p>\n

<\/div>
<\/svg><\/div>

\"You build on failure. You use it as a stepping\u00a0stone.\" - Johnny Cash<\/p><\/span><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Diving into the first good\u00a0idea<\/h2>\n

All too often, product teams try to use the first idea that seems to be promising to build a final solution. Teams believe that they\u2019ll save a lot of time by doing that.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

As a result, they spend countless hours creating and polishing the prototype. But early results of usability testing can lead to frustration \u2014 when designers will find out that their initial idea wasn\u2019t good enough.<\/p>\n

Experienced teams know that it\u2019s essential to explore and test a range of different ideas first, and only after that stick to the one that demonstrated the best results. By spending more time ideating, the team learns more about the problem space and the potential solutions.<\/p>\n

Falling in love with your prototype<\/h2>\n

Creators of a prototype often become overly invested in their creation. This problem is known as \u2018investment bias\u2019 \u2014 the more time you spend on something, the more valuable it becomes for you<\/em> (notice, valuable for you, not other people).
\nIt can lead to potentially dangerous situations when prototypes become too precious for designers, and they overlook its faults. Even when it becomes clear that the ideas are problematic, designers ignore any feedback from team members.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Prototypes shouldn\u2019t be your\u00a0precious<\/p><\/div><\/center><\/p>\n

Spending too much time on polishing a prototype takes away from the primary goal of prototyping \u2014\u00a0gaining feedback.<\/em> Always make sure that your prototype has just the right level of detail required for what you are testing for.<\/p>\n

<\/div>
<\/svg><\/div>

A prototype is not a work of art, it\u2019s a tool that helps you find\u00a0answers<\/p><\/span><\/blockquote>\n

If you\u2019re prone to over-designing, focus on the minimum viable prototypes \u2014 add just enough details to accomplish a task. Think of a prototype as a disposable artefact. Each prototype serves a specific purpose and when that has been achieved, be ready to replace it with something better.<\/p>\n

Ignoring sketching<\/h2>\n

\u2018Why should I use pen and paper when I have powerful prototyping tools?\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n

Designers skip sketching phase and move directly to computers to create digital prototypes. They believe that digital prototyping will be a time-saver. But in reality, sketching allows designers to move much faster.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Paper sketching. Image: Sockyung\u00a0Hong<\/a><\/p><\/div>\n

Next time, when you have a few ideas on how to solve a problem and not sure what works the best, simply start sketching. Sketch out all variations, post them side-by-side on the wall and discuss what is possible\/impossible from a technical\/business point of view with your team.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Image: Venturebeat<\/a><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

Selecting wrong fidelity for a prototype<\/h2>\n

The term 'fidelity' describes the level of details. Prototypes can be anything from low-fidelity paper prototypes to ultra-realistic, high-fidelity, digital prototypes that look and work like a real product. It might be tempting to jump quickly into something that will look like the final design. But it\u2019s better to prevent that temptation. It's worth remembering that:<\/p>\n

<\/div>
<\/svg><\/div>

The fidelity of your prototype should match a fidelity of your\u00a0thinking<\/p><\/span><\/blockquote>\n

It means that designers should choose the fidelity based on where they are in design process. When designers break this rule, this often leads to the bad outcome. For example, executing early prototypes at too high fidelity may result in \u2018investment bias\u2019 (falling in love with a prototype).<\/p>\n