Podcast appearances and mentions of dana chisnell

In this episode of The CX Tipping Point Podcast, Martha Dorris spoke to Dana Chisnell, the Executive Director of the Customer Experience Directorate and Stephanie Moore, the Program Manager for the implementation of Executive Order 14058 on “Transforming Federal Customer Experience and Service Delivery to Rebuild Trust in Government” in the Department of Homeland Security. DHS is dedicated to transforming their most impactful services to meet the needs of the 1 billion touch points a year. As stated in the 2023 CX Annual Report, DHS believes that better customer experience means that the touch points they have with the public are more secure, equitable, efficient, effective and accessible for everyone.   In this episode, you will learn how DHS:Is creating a department that is human-centeredHas created and staffed a Customer Experience Directorate that included over 70 experts.Has created alignment between the agency's strategic plan and their information technology strategy and across headquarters and the eight operating components and on improving the services they deliverIs driving culture change and building their internal capacity for modernizing services and improving customers' experience across the 8 operating components  Is impacting the lives of their customers and users, including the public, travelers, businesses, non-citizens in the immigration process, disaster survivors, and more.At the core, customer experience and human centered design isn't an initiative.  It's about creating a human centered organization that embeds customer-focused thinking into every aspect of operations.  It's about a way of thinking and working that addresses issues and finds solutions for the people they serve.

Eric Hysen, the DHS chief information officer, and Dana Chisnell, the director of CX, are expanding their priorities areas to include more customer and employee experience goals as outlined in a new IT strategic plan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Eric Hysen, the DHS chief information officer, and Dana Chisnell, the director of CX, are expanding their priorities areas to include more customer and employee experience goals as outlined in a new IT strategic plan.

Dana Chisnell joined the US Digital Service as a Policy Design Researcher and General Problem Solver. Her current challenge is designing for language access.  The US government makes all kinds of information available in multiple languages, depending on the program, mostly in print. This is a logistics problem, but also a power/equity issue. How do we design for it? And how do you get started in this kind of government work? Presenter: Dana Chisnell (US DHS) Moderator: Nancy Frishberg Dana Chisnell’s website Dana Chisnell on LinkedIn Society for Technical Communication Center for Civic Design United States Digital Service Topics include – technical writing – document design – government policy – US Digital Service – civic design – language accessThe post Episode #24: Language Access to Government (LCL Audio) first appeared on Linguistics Careercast.

Have you ever wondered what it's like to work in product management and UX design in the government? Dana Chisnell, the Acting Executive Director for Customer Experience at Homeland Security, tells Melissa Perri what it's like in this episode of Product Thinking. Dana shares her journey from being an independent consultant to ultimately joining Homeland Security. She describes the challenges of implementing human-centered design in a massive government organization, and the importance of proactive user research to inform service design. Listen in to learn how Dana and her team are working to improve customer experiences for the public in their interactions with DHS agencies, from TSA to FEMA. Dana Chisnell is the Acting Executive Director for Customer Experience at Homeland Security. She has over two decades of experience in UX design and research, and has worked with both private companies and government agencies. Dana is the co-founder of the Center for Civic Design, a nonprofit organization that works to improve the voting experience for all citizens. She also served on the board of the Usability Professionals' Association and is a frequent speaker at conferences on user experience design, research, and civic technology. You'll hear Melissa and Dana talk about: Proactive user research is essential to inform service design in the government context, and to improve customer experiences for the public. Implementing human-centered design in a massive government organization like DHS requires a shift in mindset from focusing on reactive customer service to proactively understanding the needs of customers and reaching the most vulnerable. Product management and user experience design are relatively new concepts to the federal government, and there is a need to expand the pool of practitioners and build design and research ops. DHS has committed to improving customer experiences across its agencies, including FEMA, TSA, USCIS, and CBP. Dana's team at Homeland Security is working on building and scaling design and research ops, and expanding the pool of practitioners, while also supporting the commitments made by DHS agencies under President Biden's executive order. Different government agencies have varying levels of CX and UX maturity. The government is focused on impact and improving people's lives rather than maximizing revenue, which changes the incentives for product decisions. The process of product management and user experience design is similar in the private and public sectors, but outcomes are measured differently in the government. The political climate in the Executive Office and Congress can affect the potential outcomes for the public. The challenge in government is getting stakeholders to think about outcomes rather than outputs. Demonstrating the impact that a program will have on people helps get stakeholders to shift their mindset towards outcomes. Problem focus is still applicable in government product management, just like in the private sector. When working for the government, it's important to take into account the whole population, not just a perfect persona that a private company may prioritize. Dana advises starting by working with the most vulnerable people first, such as those who have been historically marginalized, to understand their situation before moving on to other groups of personas. The power dynamic when doing user research with vulnerable people is sensitive, and it's important to not make people more vulnerable and afraid by doing the research and design work. Third parties such as vendors or nonprofits may be trained to do the work instead. Everyone on a team should do research, regardless of their role, to gain exposure to users and customers. The government measures user experience by the level of burden experienced when filling out a form. There are incentives for lowering that burden, and basic usability testing with the intended audience can help achieve this. Resources: Dana Chisnell on Website | LinkedIn | Twitter CX at Homeland Security

Episode 072 of Underserved features Brian Durkin, Sr. Group Manager & Head of User Experience, Data & Analytics at BNY Mellon. Brian leveraged his art degree into some web design work but found his true passion was in information architecture. He came to this realization in the middle of an interview, which he politely asked to terminate. Instead, he was offered a new IA job the next day! Also covered: World IA Day, getting fintech to understand IA, and the fun parts of working for Nickelodeon.     Charles Zicari, Brian's first real IA mentor: https://www.linkedin.com/in/charles-zicari-90798/   IxDA: https://ixda.org/   UXPA Boston: http://uxpaboston.org/    World IA Day, Brian started the one for Boston: https://worldiaday.org/    Some of the past speakers of World IA Day Boston:  Peter Morville - https://www.linkedin.com/in/morville    Steve Portigal - https://www.linkedin.com/in/steveportigal/  Josh Seiden - https://www.linkedin.com/in/jseiden/  Abby Covert - https://www.linkedin.com/in/abbytheia/  Aaron Irizarry - https://www.linkedin.com/in/aaroni/  Todd Zaki-Warfel - https://www.linkedin.com/in/zakiwarfel/  Dana Chisnell - https://www.linkedin.com/in/dana-chisnell/  Christina Wodtke - https://www.linkedin.com/in/christinawodtke/ 

- Dana’s stories about usability testing on ballot design prototypes - Overcoming stakeholder objections for doing user research - Challenges of local and federal elections in the United States - Ballot design and voter experience - Doing research for civic design and overcoming very complex roadblocks - How to get deep domain expertise in a regulated industry as a designer - Why our common approach to software design isn’t enough for civic design problems

There’s a presidential election coming up in less than a month, in an unprecedented time. Today we’ll be discussing the intersection of design and voting; how to make voting a good experience and make it accessible and equitable for all. Every election’s stakes are high, yet roughly 60% of Americans don’t turn out to vote. As one of our guests wrote: The real problem is that voting in America is just hard. Like anything, voting is an experience that should be designed to maximize participation. This week’s guest co-host is an expert on design and voting; Dana Chisnell is the Director of Project ReDesign at the National Conference on Citizenship. Prior to her current role, she was instrumental in developing the Field Guides to Ensuring Voter Intent. We talk to Dana about her career in civic design and how design plays a role in making voting easier for everyone involved. And our guest is Beth Huang. She’s the Director of Massachusetts Voter Table, where she works with community organizations to increase voter turnout and civic leadership in communities of color and working-class people in the state. We chat with Beth about her strategies for engaging new voters, not just for the 2020 presidential election, but for local and state elections as well as for ongoing political participation. Plus, we have our weekly dose of good design for you.For links to resources we discuss on this episode, visit our show page: Designing the Voter Experience for Accessibility and Engagement

UX-radio.com is a podcast about Information Architecture, User Experience, and Design. Hosts Lara Fedoroff and Chris Chandler talk with industry experts with the purpose to educate, inspire and share resources. In this episode, we talk to Dana about her many contributions to civic design.

We talk to Dana Chisnell about her work in helping government tackle UX design problems, and her optimism for the future.

My guest today is Eduardo Ortiz. Eduardo is a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and former Director at the U.S. Digital Service. More recently, Eduardo co-founded &Partners, a social impact design and engineering studio that works with organizations to help improve their communities. In this episode, we discuss how they manage their information to drive change. Listen to the full conversation https://theinformeddotlife.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/the-informed-life-episode-19-eduardo-ortiz-2.mp3 Show notes @EduardoOrtiz on Twitter Eduardo on LinkedIn &Partners (Eduardo's company) ASIS&T Sigia-l mailing list Louis Rosenfeld U.S. Marine Corps U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau U.S. Digital Service healthcare.gov 18F U.S. General Services Administration U.S. Small Business Administration U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Department of Education U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Dana Chisnell New America Vera Institute of Justice Jennifer Anastasoff Asana Google Forms Google Docs Google Sheets @andprtnrs on Twitter &Partners on LinkedIn Read the full transcript Jorge: Eduardo, welcome to the show. Eduardo: Thank you Jorge. I appreciate it. Jorge: I'm very excited to have you here. For folks who don't know you, how do you introduce yourself? Eduardo: I usually don't. I'd say that I'm Eduardo and that I'm a failed engineer trying to make it as a designer. That's about it. Jorge: Well, you and I have been friends for a while and I've been following your trajectory and I think that you have a very interesting background. Why don't you tell us a little bit about that? Eduardo: Sure, I went to school for computer software engineer, and as I was finishing my degree, I was thoroughly bored with it because my focus was on creating software for hardware. And I wanted to do something different and I started looking at what other people were doing so that a lot of my friends were in Parsons and they seemed to actually have fun doing whatever was it that we're going to school for a while I was mostly, most of the time, miserable or in front of my computer. And I started developing a need and a want to do more of what they were doing. So I started taking design courses and just like playing with things trying to figure out what I could do with what I had learned in school, but not do what I was in school for. And I started working on higher levels of the stack and finally being in the front end. And from there, I stumbled upon the ASIS&T list and some guy named Lou Rosenfeld who had sent the message that he was moving to Brooklyn. I lived in Brooklyn, so I offered to pick him up from the airport because there was a strike in New York going on. And then just a bunch of jumps from places to places, I ended up calling myself an information architect then an experience architect then a user experience designer and now I've launched my own firm focus on leveraging search design and technology to help people be able to get it to live a better life. Jorge: That's a great articulation of your professional journey, and I didn't know that little tidbit about picking up Lou at the airport. That's great. Eduardo: I actually never ended up picking him up. Jorge: You didn't? Eduardo: But no, that is how I ended up even making it as an information architect or even taking that route, because of that conversation that we started. Jorge: I pointed out the professional trajectory because I also recall seeing that you've served in the military as well, right? Eduardo: Yeah, I spent 12 years in the Marines. Jorge: And recently you were also working in government, right? Eduardo: Yes, I've done two spins in the civilian side of the government. The first of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, working with the Technology and Innovation Group, and most recently with the U.S. Digital Service focusing on immigration reform. Jorge: What is the U.S. Digital Service, for folks who don't know? Eduardo: Yeah, the U.S. Digital Service is a component of the White House that was established by the Obama Administration after the healthcare.gov nightmare with the vision of bringing thoughtful design, engineering, product, and research capabilities within different government agencies to focus on the most critical products and the most critical services provided to the public. Jorge: So it's sort of like an internal agency for the government? Eduardo: Yeah, it's sort of an internal Agency for the government. Very similar to to 18F within the General Services Administration. And it is the goal was to have technologies — and I'm using the word “technologies” in very general terms — that were able to, for a short stint of time up to a year or two, to focus on critical problems and do so from a position of strength because they had coverage from the White House. But also because they knew that they were not going to end up dealing with much of the bureaucracy that usually federal workers trying to do the same thing deal with. Jorge: It sounds like an opportunity to impact a lot of folks. Eduardo: Oh 100%. I don't think that I've ever done something much more impactful than that. I mean you're talking that any kind of work that you do, you're impacting tens of thousands, if not millions of people. The U.S. Digital Service has had branches at the Small Business Administration, at the Department of Defense, at Homeland Security, at the Department of Education, at Health and Human Services. And you're talking that these are folks that have partnered with federal employees to accelerate the go-to-market stage of a lot of services that have been critical. Jorge: When I hear you use that phrase, “go to market,” it sounds like a phrase that I associate with an enterprise setting, right? Was part of it also infusing that spirit into government? Eduardo: It very much is. And you will hear that in government, the terms that are used have been evolving for quite a while. The focus is no longer on the requirements, the focus is on people and people's needs. The focus is not on meeting, but now on what are the goals? So the conversation has definitely been shifting to a more humane one, where the technology is merely an accelerator and an enabler rather than the “end all, be all.” Jorge: Now, you were saying that you left the government and have started your own firm. What are you doing there? Eduardo: I launched &Partners in the fall of 2017. And our focus has been on leveraging research and design and technology to try to solve critical problems that positively affect the social safety net. And we say so like this because for us, it's critical to the work that we are doing is positive and is actually affecting people in positive ways, and helping people be able to live better lives. So since we launched, we've taken on number of paying clients, but we've also done… I guess our first project was an unpaid, pro-bono work project. It was last year, when this administration callously started separating children from their parents. I was made aware that this was happening sometime in June when the story broke. And a friend from USDS, she asked me, “what are you guys going to do about it?” And I was like completely dumbfounded. I was like, “What do you mean we?” She's like, “If &Partners doesn't do something, no one will.” And I'm like, “We're literally, it's just three founders and we have no money. I'm not sure what you mean.” And we kept on chatting and then that was like the end of it. And that just like started eating at me, the “What are we going to do about it?” And this was very akin to a tactic that Dana Chisnell used on me when I joined the U.S. Digital Service, which was telling me that I needed to do something, know what's meaningful, and that my country needed me. And that kind of call-to-arms was something that I couldn't ignore. And the same thing happened here. My partners and I, we started doing research to try to figure out what exactly what's going on, which really meant making a lot of calls and starting to read the news to truly understand what was happening at the Southwest border. And when we kind of came up to an idea of what we could do or what the challenges were, I started talking to my wife who was a public defender, and she helped me kind of create this understanding, this framework for how children and families could be helped from a position of a legal expert, if you will. And once I had that I made a call out to pretty much anyone and everyone who had cycles to spare to join me. And about 40 people ended up volunteering to to join us and we ended up creating pretty much a relationship management system that we then partnered with New America and the Vera Justice Network, to provide a system that the legal providers at the Southwest border could use to reunify families. Jorge: To me, this is so cool… To hear this, that you're taking something that that you saw playing out in the public sphere and asking yourself the question, “Well, what can I do about it?” And then putting in motion this project to actually do something about it, is something that I think it's inspiring. One of the challenges I think that we face in our time is that we have this illusion that because we're, I don't know, tweeting about problems, that somehow that's helping the problem get solved, right? So it says it sounds to me like you're doing actually something about it, which is cool. Eduardo: It's funny because tweeting sometimes can have that that effect of helping to address and solve problems because it helps amplify information, which oftentimes it's critical. If people don't know about something, it's really difficult for someone to actually do something about it. And just a point of clarification, I had no intent on doing anything about the problem of unaccompanied children at the Southwest border, if it had not been for my friend who called me out, to Jennifer Anastasoff who was the Head of People for USDS before she left. If it had not been for her, I probably would not have done this. We probably would not have done this. But I think that kind of like ends up being what we all try to do, create these networks around us that help us be the best version of ourselves that we can be. Jorge: Well, in any case, kudos because like I said, it's going beyond talking about it and actually doing something about it. But now let me play it back to you to see if I heard correctly. So what you all did is you designed and built a system that makes it easier for folks that are working within the legal system to assist the people who are in need of their services. Is that right? Eduardo: Pretty much, yeah. Jorge: Do you know if it's being used, if it's had the effects that you hoped it would have? Eduardo: So it was used for a little bit, but then the legal system kind of like caught up and threw some injunctions that, in theory, prevented this administration from continuing to separate families, even though we've read there have been a number of news reports that has not been the case. But through those injunctions it meant that the system was no longer necessary, since in theory, the government was no longer going to keep separating families. Jorge: That's an example of the sort of work that you all are doing. I think that would qualify in the pro bono space that you mentioned. Eduardo: I said pro bono because no one got paid. Jorge: Yeah. Eduardo: This is something that needed to be done and number of people jumped on board to get it done. There were almost like 40 people volunteering their time. I'm still flabbergasted at the names and the people that actually joined and I won't start naming them because I will more than likely leave people out and forget about it. But for people that were involved with what was called project Quetzal and who had a hand in helping reunify children with their families know that you will forever have my gratitude. Jorge: You mentioned that the focus of the company is on problems that affect the social safety net, and it's pretty clear how something like the one that you're describing falls into that category. Are you also working with corporations, with for-profit businesses? Eduardo: We are. And funny that you ask… One of the first things [inaudible] when we started was that we were not going to be working with any corporation, that we were not going to be working with the government. And in hindsight. I had no clue what we even thought we were going to be working with had that been the case. But smarter minds prevailed and we shifted our approach and instead what we have articulated has been this rubric that allows us to clearly determine whether an organization is going to be a Good Shepherd in the social space and someone that we actually want to be associated with. So whether it is a government agency, whether it is a corporation, for profit or not, we put everyone through this rubric that we have developed to make sure that they meet the minimum standards that we have set for the organization that we want to work with. And once that actually takes place, we still have an internal vote to determine whether it is something that we should be doing or not. Jorge: Without naming names, can give us examples of the types of projects that you're taking on in that domain? Eduardo: Yeah, of course. We helped develop the future generation of a system that allows lawful permanent residents to apply to become citizens with legal assistance. We have been for the past eight months working on developing a future generation electronic health record system that is focused on the provider's perspective rather than the billing and encoding perspective. And we are working on helping farmers get the workers to work their farms faster by leveraging technology to address the bureaucracy. Jorge: Those sound like really complex, meaty systems challenges. Eduardo: They are and they are so exciting to be working on because it's not just a technology problem. It's not about writing code, it's about taking into account the whole ecosystem around it, like a true people, process, and technology approach. Jorge: You said, when you were telling me the story about offering to pick Lou up at the airport and such, that you start calling yourself an information architect. And I'm wondering as you're describing all this what role information plays in in all this, and more to the point, how you all manage your information to get things done. Eduardo: Yeah, information is central to everything that I do. Relationships, which to me are the the avenues through which information flows, are critical to what we do and how we do things because we are not in a position that everyone knows about. So who we work with is through those relationships, because someone has mentioned to someone else that they should that they should talk to us. And as such, when we are afforded those introductions, for us that relationship and that information that is captured is something that is cherished, very something that is… That is actually taken care of. So yeah, permission is simpler for us. Jorge: Well, I feel like I want to unpack that because you mentioned that the project that you did in the Southwest border revolved around relationship management. And now you're you're highlighting the fact that relationship management is also critical for your own business in getting the word out and all that. How are you managing relationships with some kind of system? Eduardo: So we have developed our own system based on technology, but it is not its own technological system, if you will. We use a series of tools to allow us to document the connections that we have, what information we have on those connections, what actually matters, what we should be sharing, what is often important to that person, the projects that are either linked to them or the referrals that are coming from them. And then we track everything through a number of buckets that allows us to understand where things are during the lifecycle of a relationship. Jorge: When you say “we,” how many people are you talking about? How many of you all participate? Eduardo: There are nine employees, including myself, right now in &Partners, and pretty much everyone has a hand in doing this. Jorge: And you said it's a homegrown system. Is it based on anything like open source technologies? Is it web-based? Eduardo: Well, it's just so it's a system of systems if you will. So we use Asana, primarily but we use Google forms as well and we use a lot of the Google Docs aside from formed to develop the information and capture it. Jorge: That's fantastic. I feel like I want to unpack it a little bit because these are tools that pretty much everyone has access to, right? And knowing you and your and your trajectory, you'll have probably given a lot of thought to the structuring of these things so that they can serve these purposes. Can you tell us a little bit about that? Eduardo: I mean I said this during my keynote of the IA Conference: said I have never invented anything in my life and the same the same is true of now. I think that we took a system and a series of tools and we just mashed them together to achieve what we need. Let's take for example this relationship management that we are talking about. So specifically, on the project intake, on that rubric, so we first started working the developing what a rubric was using Google Docs. Once we had a good narrative and a good approach for what it was, we then shifted to using Google Sheets because we needed to provide criteria for evaluation. And this is where we started trying to figure out, well, are we saying that something is good bad or okay, or are we giving it a ranking from 0 to 5? What is 5, what is 0? What does bad mean? What does good mean? And in order to do that we had shifted to Google Sheets rather than Excel. Once we determined what that was, we needed the input facing side of it. And so, we went back to Google Docs to document what kind of information do we need in order to be able to determine whether something is good, bad, or okay. And we started documenting the type of information that we needed, the type of information that would be good to have, and the type of information that meant — that didn't mean anything and that there was no reason for us to capture it. And once we had those two things together, then the two things we created a Google Form that allowed for the capture of the information for the data entry side, and we created an Asana project along with a number of stages that then allowed the Google Form to dynamically populate the Asana project with those with those things that we're putting through the Google Forms. And then the stage after that, when something has made it past our intake if you will, we will manually take that card, develop it into its own project that has its own structure and then we start the process all over again. Jorge: So this is a way of evaluating the leads for projects that you're going to be working on? Eduardo: Yes. Jorge: I was very intrigued when you said that that you have Google Forms feeding the Asana project directly. So it really is a mash-up of these various tools. Eduardo: Yes, it is 100% a mash-up. A better way that did not involve me having to deal with Salesforce, or having to hire a Salesforce expert, I would greatly look at it. Jorge: I was about to ask you, you know, if you all had evaluated other solutions. Because I know that there are some tools — and Salesforce is one of them — but there are some tools that do this sort of thing. Why did you choose to do the mash up? Eduardo: We did. The mash-up was done in order to allow us to have historical information about any project in about anyone that we work with. So we make Asana work as our CRM through a number of customizations that we have made, and that allows us to be able to track that a project that we that we did came in through a specific person, and everyone that was part of that project, and what were the rules for those different people? What were the things that they had a hand in? Because that will then allow us — which is something that we do at the end of every project — is we develop an after-action report for everything that we do. So it allows us to evaluate how we worked., what were the results, what were the expectations coming into the project, and what were the things that made the project work or not. And allows us almost to compare different projects or projects that actually worked and went well and projects that didn't, and try to in a way, say well, why didn't this project work? Why did this project work? What did we have here that we didn't have there? And allows us to then tweak our rubric but also it helps us understand what we are doing wrong in order to stop it, what we are doing that needs to be improved, and to improve even further on the things that we are doing well. Jorge: There's this aspect of learning to the system somehow, which I'm guessing that by using fairly — you alluded to like having to deal with Salesforce developers, and my sense is that The Google Suite and things like Asana, they don't require this development know-how, right? Eduardo: They don't. The curb to learn how to develop this system into something that works for you is very very low, so it's easy to deal with. Jorge: I can see that. Especially when you have a distributed team. Are you all in the same place? Eduardo: We are not. We are all distributed. We have folks in New York, New Mexico, Seattle. Myself, I am in DC. We have some co-workers in Virginia. We have folks in in LA and we have one of our colleagues in the Netherlands. Jorge: Wow, I didn't realize that you were even International. That's fantastic. Eduardo: Things have happened organically, and I am still trying to figure out why everyone has trusted me and jumped onboard into what is to me an experiment. That an organization that is solely focused on doing the right thing can be profitable and can help everyone be able to go to sleep at night and say, “I did something good today.” Jorge: Well Eduardo, congratulations. That seems like a really great place to wrap it up. Eduardo: Thank you, I appreciate it. Jorge: Good luck with the experiment. And why don't you tell us where folks can follow up with you? Eduardo: Yeah, so if folks want to follow up with me, I'm on Twitter at Eduardo Ortiz. I am on LinkedIn, I think under my same name, is Eduardo S. Ortiz. Or if folks want to figure out what &Partners is doing, we are on both Twitter and LinkedIn as well. On Twitter, it's andprtnrs, and on LinkedIn it's And Partners, all spelled out. Jorge: Fantastic, I'm going to include the links in the show notes to make it easier for folks. Eduardo: That is perfect. Jorge: Well, thank you so much for your time Eduardo, it's been a pleasure talking with you. Eduardo: Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. And I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you and to your audience.

This is HCD is brought to you by Humana Design and The Academy.ie Hello, welcome to Bringing Design Closer. My name is Gerry Scullion and I’m a service design practitioner and trainer based in Dublin City, Ireland. In this episode, I caught up with the wonderful, the one and only, Dana Chisnell. Now, we met a number of years ago when I was speaking at UX Scotland and had a great conversation at that time about design in government. I’m delighted today to continue that conversation on the show. We also speak about her time working on a tour of duty type of project for two years within the Obama administration, designing for comprehension and also, get some more sage advice from Dana about the early-stage design activities to do within an organisation of low design maturity.  Dana on Twitter Centre of Civic Design Have feedback on this episode? Click here to leave us a voice mail. Connect with This is HCD Advertise (help support us) with us on This is HCD  Follow This is HCD us on Twitter Follow This is HCD on Instagram Sign up for our newsletter (we have lots of design giveaways!) Join the practitioner community on This is HCD Slack Channel Read articles on our This is HCD Network on Medium Other podcasts on This is HCD  Power of Ten with Andy Polaine EthnoPod with Jay Hasbrouck Bringing Design Closer with Gerry Scullion ProdPod with Adrienne Tan Getting Started in Design with Gerry Scullion Talking Shop with Andy Polaine and Gerry Scullion Decoding Culture with Dr. John Curran   Support the show.

This is HCD is brought to you by Humana Design and The Academy.ie Hello, welcome to Bringing Design Closer. My name is Gerry Scullion and I’m a service design practitioner and trainer based in Dublin City, Ireland. In this episode, I caught up with the wonderful, the one and only, Dana Chisnell. Now, we met a number of years ago when I was speaking at UX Scotland and had a great conversation at that time about design in government. I’m delighted today to continue that conversation on the show. We also speak about her time working on a tour of duty type of project for two years within the Obama administration, designing for comprehension and also, get some more sage advice from Dana about the early-stage design activities to do within an organisation of low design maturity.  Dana on Twitter Centre of Civic Design Have feedback on this episode? Click here to leave us a voice mail. Connect with This is HCD Advertise (help support us) with us on This is HCD  Follow This is HCD us on Twitter Follow This is HCD on Instagram Sign up for our newsletter (we have lots of design giveaways!) Join the practitioner community on This is HCD Slack Channel Read articles on our This is HCD Network on Medium Other podcasts on This is HCD  Power of Ten with Andy Polaine EthnoPod with Jay Hasbrouck Bringing Design Closer with Gerry Scullion ProdPod with Adrienne Tan Getting Started in Design with Gerry Scullion Talking Shop with Andy Polaine and Gerry Scullion Decoding Culture with Dr. John Curran   Support the show.

Jared Spool and Dana Chisnell join Tim Keirnan for a conversation about what Tim is calling the "buzzwordification" of UX. Has the increasing notoriety of this profession label helped us? Has it hindered us? Maybe it's a balance of pro and con. Maybe we just need to meet in a rental car in a parking garage somewhere in Dearborn and hash it out. Jared can be found at User Interface Engineering and the Center Centre school. Check the UIE site for his upcoming appearances in a city near you. Dana can be found at the Center for Civic Design. She is also, among many other wonderful things, the co-author of the legendary Handbook of Usability Testing 2nd Edition. She travels, too. Meet her if you can. This is the second in a series of indeterminate length. While not linked in any way beside the topic, you may also be interested in listening to the first conversation in the series with Serena Rosenhan and Keith Instone.

This week we talk to Laura Yarrow - UX Consultant at Experience UX. Like all UX conversations we start by clarifying what it really is, before discussing how to start in UX and what you can do if you don't have a big budget, before settling on a mini-rant about dark patterns. Oh, and Laura had it right all along, of course. REFERENCES: Paper Prototype example: https://twitter.com/laura_yarrow/status/1114446460513390592 UX Professional Association: https://uxpa.org Interesting UX People: Kim Goodwin - https://twitter.com/kimgoodwin Dana Chisnell - https://twitter.com/danachis Jared Spool - https://twitter.com/jmspool Good Web Form design: https://www.lukew.com/resources/web_form_design.asp

“Voting in American is hard. There are far more steps than people realise” said Dana Chisnell. We talk to Dana about democracy as a design problem. We look at how the design of civic engagement impacts on both registration and participation and how that impact varies for burdened and privileged voters. We learn a lot... The post #193 Designing democracy with Dana Chisnell appeared first on UX Podcast.

Hi #analyseheld, glaubst du Best Practices anderer Unternehmen und kopierst sie einfach oder testest du, was DEINE Kunden wollen? Hältst du Testing für eine einmalige Sache oder ist es bei dir schon Teil der Unternehmenskultur? Wie auch immer, du solltest dringend hier in das erste Vis-a-vis-Interview mit Thorsten Biedenkapp reinhören, damit du erfährst, was genau du mit Testing erreichen kannst und welche Möglichkeiten es gibt. Wieder eine Menge "Holz" für dich und natürlich gibt's am Ende drei Tipps von Thorsten! Viel Spaß beim Hören. Du hast eine Frage? Schicke mir eine Mail an podcast@metrika.de Shownotes Links: Biedenkapp IT: http://www.biedenkapp.it/ Bücher The Design of Everyday Things (Don Norman) Don't Make Me Think (Steve Krug) Rocket Surgery Made Easy (Steve Krug) Handbook of Usability Testing (Jeffrey Rubin, Dana Chisnell, Jared Spool) Usability Testing Essentials (Carol M. Barnum) Conversion Rate Optimierung (André Morys) A/B-Testlaufzeit-Rechner: https://converlytics.com/dauer-rechner-ab-test/ Heuristische Evaluation (nach Nielsen): https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/ Usability-Testessen: https://usability-testessen.org/ USER EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE UEQ (SAP): https://www.ueq-online.org/ Hier findet ihr Thorsten Biedenkapp: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thorstenbiedenkapp/ XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Thorsten_Biedenkapp Twitter: http://twitter.com/biedenkappIT Workshops und Seminare mit Maik: https://www.metrika.de/seminare-workshops/ Facebook-Gruppe für #analysehelden (und natürlich auch Einsteiger): https://www.facebook.com/groups/analysehelden/ Facebook-Gruppe für Einsteiger: https://www.facebook.com/groups/webanalyseeinsteiger/ Bewerte den Podcast Meine Bitte: Wenn dir diese Folge gefallen hat, hinterlasse bitte eine 5-Sterne-Bewertung bei iTunes oder wo immer du abonniert hast, gerne ein Feedback im Blogpost oder ein Like/Share bei Facebook und abonniere diesen Podcast. Auch ein Like bei Podbean würde mich sehr freuen. Zeitinvestition: Maximal ein bis zwei Minuten. Dadurch hilfst du mir den Podcast zu verbessern und die Inhalte zu liefern, die du gerne hören möchtest. Ich danke dir jetzt schon dafür. Schaue auch gerne bei metrika.de oder die-sendung-mit-der-metrik.de vorbei.

In the field of UX research Dana Chisnell is a pioneer. As you will hear, she has lived and shaped it’s history and continues to do so. She is currently working as an Adjunct Professor at Harvard, Co-Director of the center for Civic Design, and as a Principal Researcher at UsabilityWorks. I went into this conversation with Dana, expecting to focus on usability testing, how to do it, what makes someone great at it, etc. etc. Dana is a world class expert on this. As you’ll see we did discuss that towards the end, but Dana’s experience in the U.S. Digital Service was a powerful reminder of the sometimes blurred lines between designer, product manager, and researcher that I couldn't help but dig into.

This week on the program, my friend Dana Chisnell is here for a very timely conversation on how the design of ballots affects voter trust in elections. She just finished a 2-year tour with the US Digital Service and has more than a decade of experience in civic design.

Dana Chisnell, Co-Founder of the Center for Civic Design, spoke at Design Driven NYC on April 12, 2016. Chisnell highlighted classic problems with ballot design and how they can impact elections.

Dana Chisnell and Dean Logan discuss the unique challenges of bringing UX into the government sector and how some things they learned can benefit the private sector.

Dana Chisnell and Dean Logan discuss the unique challenges of bringing UX into the government sector and how some things they learned can benefit the private sector.

Enterprise applications are massive, often unwieldy pieces of software. You get a sense they were never truly improved or updated, they just had a continuous string of features tacked on until it got to the point where they are almost impossible to use. And they’re old. This focus on features let design fall to the wayside, making it less important than the application’s perceived capabilities. Now, you’re forced to stare at a screen straight out of 1995. You’ve become a time traveler, whether you were aware of it or not. We’ve come across other time travelers in our journey. You aren’t alone. One such person is Hagan Rivers, who has worked tirelessly to bring these enterprise applications into modern time, if not the future. In this podcast, listen to Jared Spool weave a tale of time travel with special guests Hagan Rivers and Dana Chisnell.

Chicago Camps interviews Dana Chisnell, Principal Consultant at UsabilityWorks, Visiting Scientist at MIT, and Co-Founder at Center for Civic Design. As if that's all not enough, Dana is a Speaker Mentor at Speaker Camp Boston on October 11th, 2014.

Getting great participants for usability studies can provide invaluable insights for your design process. But if you aren’t doing your own recruiting, you could be missing out on additional important information. Dana Chisnell has learned that the best way to find great participants is to think of recruiting as bonus user research.

Mike and guest co-host Jared Spool interview Dana Chisnell, who is doing some amazing work to ensure that voters true intent is registered at the polls. A fantastic show about the responsibility of design to civic duty. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/lets-make-mistakes/message

Dana Chisnell from Usability Works discusses her latest project, Field Guides for Ensuring Voter Intent. This Kickstarter crowd-source funded project will design, write, publish, and distribute concise design guidelines for usable ballot design to public servants around the United States. And, eventually, beyond.Learn and contribute (up until April 14th) to the project athttp://www.kickstarter.com/projects/civicdesigning/field-guides-to-ensuring-voter-intentRead Dana's thoughts on civic design athttp://civicdesigning.org/

Dana Chisnell joins Jeffrey Zeldman and Dan Benjamin to talk about UX, testing, leveraging your expertise, New York City voting booth user experience design, and more. Links for this episode:Dana ChisnellHandbook of Usability Testing - Amazon.comDana Chisnell (danachis) on TwitterDesign for Democracy — AIGA | the professional association for designUsability TestingSponsored by Zendesk and Shopify.

Dana Chisnell, usability expert, joins Jeffrey Zeldman and Dan Benjamin to discuss election design, usable security, and more.

User experience research lives or dies by the appropriateness of the participants in the study. If the participants match the real users, you're set. We held a Virtual Seminar with Dana Chisnell to discuss recruiting for usability testing, and this is the followup podcast to that seminar. In the podcast, Dana answers remaining questions from the seminar.

Back in October we had the good fortune to host Dana Chisnell's popular Virtual Seminar entitled "The Quick, the Cheap, and the Insightful: Conducting Usability Tests in the Wild", where she told us you don't have to run usability tests by the book to get great value out of them. Quite a statement considering she (co-)wrote the book! As usual, we received many more excellent questions that we could deal with during the seminar, so we recorded this podcast.

This week, I had the great honor of speaking with Dana Chisnell, noted usability expert and principal at Usability Works, a consultancy based in San Fransisco. Dana is also the co-author of the recently-released second edition of the Handbook of Usability Testing, a book so fine, I agreed to write the foreword.