平面设计师和ui设计师_你只是一个设计师-优快云博客

平面设计师和ui设计师

重点 (Top highlight)

Are you a designer? Maybe you’re a visual designer, a user experience designer, or a product designer. Or something else. It might be the case that you are not sure what to call yourself, or that you have difficulty explaining to others just what you do (which is even more difficult). I know I have a hard time explaining my design role(s) to others.

你是设计师吗？也许您是视觉设计师，用户体验设计师或产品设计师。或者是其他东西。可能是因为您不确定自己该怎么称呼，或者难以向他人解释自己的所作所为(这更加困难)。我知道我很难向他人解释我的设计角色。

Back in the day we all were (just) designers. There was a time where an agency had a creative director, his team of art directors, designers and maybe an intern or two. If you take a quick look around the office today you see an ever increasing number of design roles. Next to the (visual) designers you have user experience designers, service designers and sometimes even something called unicorn designers. Not to mention cool new design roles like design ninja’s and magicians you see at startups.

过去，我们都是(只是)设计师。曾经有一段时间，一个代理商有一位创意总监，他的艺术总监，设计师团队，也许还有一两个实习生。如果您今天快速浏览一下办公室，您会发现越来越多的设计角色。在(视觉)设计师旁边，您有用户体验设计师，服务设计师，有时甚至是独角兽设计师。更不用说您在初创企业中看到的酷炫的新设计角色，例如设计忍者和魔术师。

Anyway. Let’s focus on designers, user experience designers and service designers.

无论如何。让我们专注于设计师，用户体验设计师和服务设计师。

用户体验和服务设计从何而来？ (Where did user experience and service design come from?)

User experience came as a split from (web) design. Web design was too much about delivering visual work, advocates of user experience said. Most people credit Don Norman with inventing the term user experience back in the 80s. He believes that design is about more than just something that happens on a screen. It’s about the user’s physical location, the company’s services and the user’s opinion of it. I think he’s right. I believe most designers agree with him as well.

用户体验与(web)设计是分开的。用户体验的倡导者说，网络设计太过交付视觉作品。大多数人都认为Don Norman发明了80年代的术语“用户体验”。他认为设计不仅仅是屏幕上发生的事情。这与用户的地理位置，公司的服务以及用户的意见有关。我认为他是对的。我相信大多数设计师也同意他的观点。

As stated on Nielsen Norman Group’s website; “User experience” encompasses all aspects of the end-user’s interaction with the company, its services, and its products.”

如Nielsen Norman Group 网站上所述； “用户体验”涵盖了最终用户与公司，其服务和产品的交互的所有方面。”

If you believe design is about more than just pixels on a screen, I can imagine that you create your own view on design and how it should be, just like Don Norman did. It makes perfect sense. There’s a problem, however. If you skip a few years since he came up with the term user experience, you now see that we’re back where we came from. Many job openings still ask for “UI/UX designers”. The actual job openings that ask for UX designers do not always ask for UX the way Don Norman intended. In many of the UX designer job openings, designers are expected to deliver pixel perfect design, prototypes and maybe facilitate a workshop or two. There hasn’t been a lot of change in the role, except for a new name. Companies still consider UX designers to be a combination of a visual designer and what a UX designer should be. Don’t get me wrong. I understand why that’s the case. One employee who can do multiple things is cheaper than having an employee for every detail you’re working on. It is just not what Don Norman envisioned when he came up with user experience. That’s why we’re seeing a new kind of design emerging; service design.

如果您认为设计不仅仅是屏幕上的像素，我可以想象您像唐·诺曼(Don Norman)一样在设计上创建自己的视图及其外观。这是很合理的。但是有一个问题。如果距离他提出用户体验一词已经过去了几年，现在您会看到我们回到了我们的所在地。许多职位空缺仍然要求“ UI / UX设计人员”。要求UX设计人员的实际职位空缺并不总是按Don Norman的意图要求UX。在许多UX设计师的职位空缺中，期望设计师提供像素完美的设计，原型，并可能促进一两次研讨会。除了新名称外，角色没有太大变化。公司仍然认为UX设计器是视觉设计器和UX设计器应该是的组合。不要误会我的意思。我知道为什么会这样。一位可以完成多项工作的员工比让您处理每个细节的员工要便宜。这不是Don Norman提出用户体验时所设想的。这就是为什么我们看到一种新型设计的出现；服务设计。

Yet another split. (Web) design was too much about pixels, so we moved to a new kind of design; user experience design. In practice, user experience design is still believed to be too much about pixels, so now service design takes the center stage. They use the same arguments; user experience is too much about visuals. It should be about more than what you can see on your screen. Service design is about working together with your users and stakeholders. It is about the customer journey, user research and touch points. Visual design has a lower priority for service design than it has for user experience or web design. Maybe service design is the way Don Norman wanted user experience to be?

另一个分裂。 (网络)设计过多地涉及像素，因此我们转向了一种新的设计。用户体验设计。实际上，用户体验设计仍然被认为与像素有关，因此现在服务设计占据了中心位置。他们使用相同的论点。用户体验与视觉效果有关。它应该不仅仅是屏幕上显示的内容。服务设计是与您的用户和利益相关者一起工作。它与客户旅程，用户研究和接触点有关。视觉设计在服务设计中的优先级低于在用户体验或Web设计中的优先级。也许服务设计是Don Norman希望成为用户体验的方式？

寻找设计师的平衡点 (Finding the designer’s balance)

So, we started with (web) design. Now we also have user experience design and service design (and even more). Both of which came to life because they believed design was too much about pixel perfect visual design. User experience is mostly still about pixels where service design pays less attention to visual design, while using a holistic approach to the design challenge. Service design involves other roles as well, like marketing, business and IT.

因此，我们从(网络)设计开始。现在，我们还具有用户体验设计和服务设计(甚至更多)。两者之所以成为现实，是因为他们认为设计过于关乎像素完美的视觉设计。用户体验仍然主要是像素，在这种像素中，服务设计较少关注视觉设计，而采用整体方法来应对设计挑战。服务设计还涉及其他角色，例如营销，业务和IT。

It brings us to a question. Should design be about what you see on a screen? Or should we focus on everything else? Well… Design is about pixels on a screen. Just not only about pixels. It is a subtle balance between the screen and everything evolving around the screen. Great design is where business goals meet the user’s needs. That does include the screen. It doesn’t matter what you call the design role.

它给我们带来了一个问题。设计应该与您在屏幕上看到的内容有关吗？还是我们应该专注于其他所有事情？好吧……设计是关于屏幕上的像素的。不仅仅是像素。这是屏幕与屏幕周围所有事物之间微妙的平衡。出色的设计是业务目标可以满足用户需求的地方。那确实包括屏幕。所谓的设计角色并不重要。

Designers come in different shapes and sizes. Some are called ’T shaped’, others are called ‘I shaped’ or ‘unicorns’. Maybe we should say designers are M shaped, or stop judging designers based on letter shapes all together. Sure, every designer has his specialty. You just can’t assume everybody has just one specialty (T shaped) or that his other skills are all on the same expert level (unicorn designer).

设计师有不同的形状和大小。一些被称为“ T形”，其他被称为“ I形”或“独角兽”。也许我们应该说设计师是M形的，或者停止基于字母形状一起评判设计师。当然，每个设计师都有自己的专长。您只是不能假设每个人都只有一个专业(T形)，或者他的其他技能都处于同一专家水平(独角兽设计师)。

There shouldn’t be a different label for every individualdesigner. You’re a designer. You (should) possess basic skills to make your design stick. Those skills are the same, whether you call yourself a user experience designer, a product designer or something else entirely. You should be able to develop and facilitate design sprints and workshops, be able to do your research, validate your assumptions and be able to communicate and sell your design to your stakeholders. Don’t forget; you also have to be able to make an awesome looking visual design, whether it is a presentation, a user interface prototype or a research study. It’s part of your designer’s tool box.

每个个人设计师都不应有不同的标签。你是设计师您(应该)具备使您的设计坚持下去的基本技能。无论您称自己为用户体验设计师，产品设计师还是其他人员，这些技能都是相同的。您应该能够开发和推动设计冲刺和研讨会，能够进行研究，验证假设并能够将设计交流并出售给利益相关者。不要忘记您还必须能够做出令人敬畏的视觉设计，无论是演示文稿，用户界面原型还是研究研究。它是设计师工具箱的一部分。

Why are user experience and service design two different terms? Both consider themselves to be a holistic approach to design where they focus on the entire experience, not just the pixels on screen. In theory, user experience and service design are very similar. People just expect them to be something different because they have different names.

为什么用户体验和服务设计是两个不同的术语？两者都认为自己是一种整体设计方法，他们专注于整个体验，而不仅仅是屏幕上的像素。从理论上讲，用户体验和服务设计非常相似。人们只是期望它们有所不同，因为它们具有不同的名称。

设计思维 (Design thinking)

Whichever design label you give yourself, you’ll most likely use some sort of design thinking method as a way of working. There are many different forms of design thinking as well. Design thinking has the same problem as design in general. There are so many different design thinking labels. It’s very confusing. Design thinking labels show significant overlap as well, just like user experience and service design does.

无论您给自己设计标签是什么，您都很有可能会使用某种设计思维方法作为工作方式。设计思维也有许多不同的形式。设计思想与一般设计有相同的问题。有太多不同的设计思维标签。这非常令人困惑。设计思维标签也显示出明显的重叠，就像用户体验和服务设计一样。

At Idean, we work using a double diamond visualisation of design thinking.

在Idean ，我们使用设计思维的双重菱形可视化进行工作。

We work using three steps; discover, define, refine. It means that we start with collecting data and doing our research. We continue with prototyping during the define phase where we design different solutions and verify them. Once we have our core concept in place we continue during the refine phase. It’s a process of detailed design where we work in agile sprints to further refine and improve our concept into a full product.

我们使用三个步骤进行工作：发现，定义，完善。这意味着我们首先要收集数据并进行研究。我们在定义阶段继续进行原型设计，在此阶段中我们设计不同的解决方案并进行验证。一旦确立了核心概念，我们便会继续进行完善。这是一个详细设计的过程，我们在敏捷冲刺中工作，以进一步完善和改进我们的概念，成为一个完整的产品。

Everyone at Idean can do the work using our design thinking framework. Even though we have visual designers, user experience designers and service designers in our ranks. We’re all designers, whatever kind of designer you call yourself. The designer’s toolbox I mentioned before should be able to do the trick for the entire process.

Idean的每个人都可以使用我们的设计思维框架来完成这项工作。即使我们拥有视觉设计师，用户体验设计师和服务设计师。我们都是设计师，无论您叫自己什么样的设计师。我之前提到的设计器工具箱应该能够完成整个过程。

展望未来 (Looking to the future)

When looking forward to the future of design, I believe it is time to take a step back. We’re all the same. We’re all designers. A designer who can do anything. He can do his research and present his findings. He can validate and improve his work. He knows how to sell it. And last but not least; he knows how to make it look awesome. We’re all (just) designers after all. And that’s okay.

在展望设计的未来时，我相信是时候退后一步了。我们都是一样的。我们都是设计师。可以做任何事情的设计师。他可以进行研究并提出他的发现。他可以验证和改进他的工作。他知道如何出售。最后但并非最不重要; 他知道如何使它看起来很棒。毕竟我们都是设计师。没关系。