Thanks for your thoughts, Joshua Stehr.
You are correct that it’s hard to know where to start. Unfortunately, there isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. While JtbD tried to promise that, it doesn’t succeed. Suggesting that whatever we need to “fill the void” has to be just as simple won’t work.
Don’t believe everything you read. 😀
The Disney Parks and Resorts team that worked on the magic band was a production team with a special assignment. In addition to their work on the magic band product, they were still involved with day-to-day production of the existing systems.
A journey map shows what a user did often against a scale like frustration-to-delight.
A scenario-based persona shows how the specific differences of a user caused them to behave differently for a similar scenario. You would use the journey map of that user to show how the differences manifested themselves in the user’s behavior.
Remote research techniques for lab-based studies, such as usability tests, are fairly straightforward. For field work, finding a place where the team can converge to do the research is the optimal approach.
Bart den Haak: have you thought about reframing the basic needs as a hunt for missing expectations? (See this for more details: https://articles.uie.com/missing_expectations/)
That might help frame how basic needs provide long term value.
As people who are hired to do magic, wouldn’t it be irresponsible to letthe people we serve “believe in magic,” since “such magic doesn’t really exist?”Isn’t part of our job to demonstrate, in a teacherly way, that there was never any magic at all?