WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:34.972
The approach that I apply to design has  evolved over a considerable amount of time.
And the name that I use to  describe it has also been evolving.
But the reason for that is because I'm also  changing what it is that we approach as designers.
So, in the very beginning, when I first started becoming a designer – which is the 1980s –
I was concerned about the early adoption of computer systems

00:00:34.972 --> 00:01:02.832
which were really almost impossible for anybody to understand;
even the experts who designed them were making errors in using them.
And there's a famous case where
the early Unix  systems had a text editor that was called "Ed" – for "Editor".
You could type away and type your  program or your text, whatever you're doing,
and spend several hours typing it, and you have this wonderful document.
And then you — "Ah, I'm finished!"; then you turn off the machine and go home.

00:01:02.832 --> 00:01:31.178
And you come back the next morning to continue and...
It wasn't there.
Well, why wasn't it there? Because you didn't *save* it.
And, well, you mean...
The system doesn't bother to tell you  when you try to turn it off that
"Hey, do you want to save the information?"
It was little things like that that were so frustrating.
In the early days, what we did is we tried to study  the people who used these complex systems.
And it was not just computer systems. I actually started off studying

00:01:31.178 --> 00:02:03.135
nuclear power systems – some of the nuclear power accidents
where the control rooms  were so badly designed that if you wanted to cause
an error, you could not have done a better job  in designing something to cause errors.
And then *aviation safety* where lives were at stake – many lives were at stake.
And there were a huge amount of research and work done,
and that was a really good  place to work.
I worked with the American National Aeronautics and Space Administration – NASA.
Most people think of NASA as shooting rockets up into space,

00:02:03.135 --> 00:02:32.793
but they forget the first two letters – "NA" – are "aeronautics".
And so, NASA is the world's leader often in aviation safety.
And that's where I started.
So, we were looking, though, at the *users* of these systems, and so we called them "users".
And I was at the University of California, San Diego at the time.
And my research group, Stephen Draper and I
edited a book that we called "User Centered System Design".

00:02:32.793 --> 00:03:00.285
And, of course, the initials of "User Centered System Design" is the name of my university: UCSD.
But we emphasized, first of all,  focusing on the users – the people – 
and, second of all, that it was a system.
The system stuff, though, kind of got dropped.
And we decided we didn't really like the focus on users.
Why are we calling you "a user"? You're a *person*.
Why don't we call you "a person"?

00:03:00.285 --> 00:03:33.850
And so, we started to call it *human-centered design*.
And many people ask me what the difference is between user-centered design and people-centered design.
And all I can say is it's the same  thing – it's just a little bit later in time.
Well human-centered design – and sometimes I even call it "people-centered design"  
– because I don't call you "a human";
I call you "a person" –
has evolved to having four major principles – namely,
- Focus on the people.
- Make sure you solve the right underlying problem.

00:03:33.850 --> 00:04:01.507
- Think of everything as a system. And
- Do iterative work.
Because we're never going to get it right;  people are far more complex,
and societies are even more complex than individual people.
So, we have to experiment, do a test,
modify, and continually improve.
So, that's the basis of all of these.
Now, I've come to start the term *humanity-centered design*.

00:04:01.507 --> 00:04:32.767
And why is that?
Well, focusing upon the individuals
is often not quite right.
You have to focus upon the groups of people, the societal issues.
You have to focus upon a larger set of things.
When you do a system analysis, that's what happens.
And so, that's why I've decided I  will start calling a lot of what I do
*humanity-centered design*.
But I still consider all of these to be one similar approach.

00:04:32.767 --> 00:05:00.705
And, in fact, some people just call it "design thinking".
Design thinking has other attributes.
For example, when I say we have four major principles,
I don't say anything about how we actually get  the clever new idea that's the breakthrough.
How do I actually do the thinking and the creative work?
And so, a lot of the emphasis in the design thinking world
are the techniques and methods that  we use to come up with novel, important

00:05:00.705 --> 00:05:23.903
and robust and doable solutions.
So, but all of these have to come together.
So, in the design world, we must have
many, many different methods and many different techniques
and many different approaches.
But what unites all of us in the field that I am talking about
is the focus upon people, society, humanity.