I think you don't understand the design process. Not being bitchy, so let me explain.
Instinct should be 1% of design if anything. Design isn't about colors and pretty, it's about a detailed process that includes data structures, mapping processes, analysis of users' behavior and removing all instinct and subjectivity from the process of design. It should include a minimum of guesswork wherever possible. It always amazes me, for example, that shared hosting comes with awstats as standard on 99% of shared hosts, but designers and web-developers alike ignore all the data sitting there available for analysis, to use just one example of how designers aren't using the tools available to them (and you have to know what to do with the awstats data too).
My prediction for the future of UX is that the army of self-taught pseudo-UX 'experts' are going to have to up their game, get some real training and stop being intuitive if the industry is to continue to grow. Would anyone on HN hire a full time software tester/QA who didn't have some training in that field? Probably, but you'd be better off with a QA who is certified.
> it's about a detailed process that includes data structures, mapping processes, analysis of users' behavior and removing all instinct and subjectivity from the process of design.
Ugh no. Please, no.
Don't do this. I'm saying – pleading – this as a user.
Apple didn't do it (but maybe now they do, and it's starting to show in some of their products as a sort of creeping clinical sterility). Steve Jobs didn't do it [0]. And yet the UX set by them has been admired, imitated and aspired-to for over 30 years.
Plenty of other examples can be seen in the UI of Japanese games versus Western games.
I'm sorry but relying on "data structures, mapping processes, analysis of users' behavior" means you suck at UX design – like reading books on how to be socially adept – and the best you're going to achieve is a functional but sterile, neutral, gray block of clinical equipment, devoid of personality and soul and color and warmth ...if you sneered at these words, then I for sure wouldn't want to be stuck using your products.
In any case, if data structures, mapping processes, and analysis of user behavior are your primary skills then you'll be replaced by AI within a decade anyway. :)
No, he's right, in part. UX & interaction design shouldn't be just about measuring clickthrough and abandon rates, or you get interfaces like Google's products, who use that design philosophy.[1]
UX design must be informed by data and field research (which depends on those "data structures, mapping processes, analysis of users' behavior"), but it still needs an opinionated designer who empathizes with the user pains and problems, and creates an interface that solves the needs as well as provides the adequate usage feeling (which, even being non-functional, is an important part of making a design usable) [2].
Intuition is going away anytime soon. The data that one can collect today cannot compete head to head with the intuition and rich mental models of someone who deeply understands some domain and how that domain connects to other aspects of the human experience. It's no contest.
Data should be used as a powerful supplement, assumptions should be validated, and due diligence must be carried out.
But if there isn't a vision behind the project, it will be likely be mediocre at best.
Design should be data informed but not data lead. Simply because data tells you about the situation now but rarely is it enough to create a model in order to predict the effect of future changes accurately. Further data generally doesn't fully describe whats happening and must be interpreted. This means both the act of understanding the product use and improving the product remain subjective at the point of design. It's only later after the product has been changed we can verify our designs.
People with good taste and domain knowledge aren't going to go away anytime soon.
Instinct should be 1% of design if anything. Design isn't about colors and pretty, it's about a detailed process that includes data structures, mapping processes, analysis of users' behavior and removing all instinct and subjectivity from the process of design. It should include a minimum of guesswork wherever possible. It always amazes me, for example, that shared hosting comes with awstats as standard on 99% of shared hosts, but designers and web-developers alike ignore all the data sitting there available for analysis, to use just one example of how designers aren't using the tools available to them (and you have to know what to do with the awstats data too).
My prediction for the future of UX is that the army of self-taught pseudo-UX 'experts' are going to have to up their game, get some real training and stop being intuitive if the industry is to continue to grow. Would anyone on HN hire a full time software tester/QA who didn't have some training in that field? Probably, but you'd be better off with a QA who is certified.