Abstract
Based on the theoretical foundations, being a user or customer is the core of each experience, whether you call it brand or user experience. Hence, an iterative user-centered design approach appears to be a valuable instrument to ensure harmony among both experience constructs. Each project needs its individual process, requiring iterations and continuous adaptations to fit the needs of the brand and user group of concern. Norman and Verganti (2014) compare user-centered design to the process of a blindfolded person climbing a hill, scanning the environment until sensing the next higher position. The mountain peak is a metaphor for the ideal quality of a product, involving all possible UX aspects. The presented UXi strategy can be understood as additional assistance, besides common approaches like usability testing. It helps designers to get to the next higher peak of the mountain, including harmony between brand experience and user experience. This includes scanning the area to find out whether the current design strategy really is the best possible solution. In order to improve the harmony between brand experience and user experience, real users of a specific target group have to be involved in evaluating the current state of a product. This chapter describes how to validate whether brand experience and user experience are harmonious or not in order to assess if the user experience fits to the expected brand experience. Therefore, the UXi Need Footprint is the foundation for different evaluation approaches creating an evaluation strategy, which can be applied depending on the project case. These approaches are described by comparing the use cases of the three controversial mobile banking apps.
This chapter was written by Anna-Katharina Frison and Katharina Holl.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Churchill, G. A., & Iacobucci, D. (2006). Marketing research: Methodological foundations. New York: Dryden Press.
Churchill, G. A., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Marketing research: Methodological foundations (10th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western/Cengage Learning.
De Chernatony, L. (2010). Creating powerful brands. London: Routledge.
Diefenbach, S., & Hassenzahl, M. (2010). Handbuch zur fun-ni toolbox. Essen: Folkwang Universität Der Künste.
Diefenbach, S., & Hassenzahl, M. (2017). Psychologie in der nutzerzentrierten Produktgestaltung: Mensch-Technik-Interaktion-Erlebnis. Berlin: Springer.
Frison, A.-K., Zotz, P., & Riener, A. (2017). The level of harmony: A validation strategy for brand & user experience. Mensch Und Computer 2017-Tagungsband.
Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2003). AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In Mensch & computer 2003 (pp. 187–196). Berlin: Springer.
Hassenzahl, M., Diefenbach, S., & Göritz, A. (2010). Needs, affect, and interactive products—Facets of user experience. Interacting with Computers, 22(5), 353–362.
Hassenzahl, M., Wiklund-Engblom, A., Bengs, A., Hägglund, S., & Diefenbach, S. (2015). Experience-oriented and product-oriented evaluation: Psychological need fulfillment, positive affect, and product perception. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(8), 530–544.
Jetter, H.-C. (2006). Die MCI im Wandel: User experience als die zentrale Herausforderung? In Mensch & computer (pp. 65–72).
Jetter, C., & Gerken, J. (2007). A simplified model of user experience for practical application. In 2nd COST294-MAUSE (pp. 106–111).
Kahneman, D. (2012). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books.
Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist, 64(6), 515.
Kroeber-Riel, W., & Gröppel-Klein, A. (2013). Konsumentenverhalten (10., überarbeitete, aktualisierte und ergänzte Auflage). München: Verlag Franz Vahlen.
Kuß, A., Wildner, R., & Kreis, H. (2014). Marktforschung: Grundlagen der Datenerhebung und Datenanalyse (5., vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.
Meschtscherjakov, A., Wilfinger, D., & Tscheligi, M. (2014). Mobile attachment causes and consequences for emotional bonding with mobile phones. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2317–2326). New York: ACM.
Norman, D. A., & Verganti, R. (2014). Incremental and radical innovation: Design research vs. technology and meaning change. Design Issues, 30(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00250.
Pettersson, I., Lachner, F., Frison, A.-K., Riener, A., & Butz, A. (2018). A Bermuda Triangle? (pp. 1–16). New York: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174035.
Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(1), 11–31.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free press.
Roto, V., Joutsela, M., & Nuutinen, M. (2016). Brand experience goals guiding the design of multiple touchpoints. In Experience design for multiple customer touchpoints workshop in conjunction with NordiCHI’ 16. October 23–27, 2016. Sweden: Gothenburg.
Roto, V., Lu, Y., Nieminen, H., & Tutal, E. (2015). Designing for user and brand experience via company-wide experience goals. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2277–2282). New York: ACM.
Roto, V., & Rautava, M. (2008). User experience elements and brand promise. In In conjunction with NordiCHI 2008 conference, Lund, Sweden (Vol. 8).
Roto, V., Väätäjä, H., Law, E., & Powers, R. (2016). Experience design for multiple customer touchpoints. In Proceedings of the 9th Nordic conference on human-computer interaction (p. 146). New York: ACM.
Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y., & Kasser, T. (2001). What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(2), 325.
Tuch, A. N., & Hornbæk, K. (2015). Does Herzberg’s notion of hygienes and motivators apply to user experience? ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 22(4), 16.
Tuch, A. N., Roth, S. P., Hornbæk, K., Opwis, K., & Bargas-Avila, J. A. (2012). Is beautiful really usable? Toward understanding the relation between usability, aesthetics, and affect in HCI. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1596–1607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.024.
Xu, L., Lin, J., & Chan, H. C. (2012). The moderating effects of utilitarian and hedonic values on information technology continuance. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 19(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/2240156.2240160.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van de Sand, F., Frison, AK., Zotz, P., Riener, A., Holl, K. (2020). UXi Validation: How to Evaluate if Brand Values Can Be Experienced by Users. In: User Experience Is Brand Experience. Management for Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29868-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29868-5_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29867-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29868-5
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)