Certification for Usability and User-Centered Design Professionals

1. Draft 0.28 May 2002 upa Certification forUsability and User-Centered Design Professionals Report on Activities of the Working Group

2. Introduction • Background • Current Work • Approach • Core Competencies • Next Steps

3. BACKGROUND Why Certification? • Driving Issues • Rapid growth of the field • Shortage of people with key stills • Value to potential employers and clients • Identification of skills required for professional work • Gap in available certifications for professionals • No certification that focuses on broad skills in user-centered design • What’s already been done • Investigations and work in the UK • Formation of international working group

4. BACKGROUND Stakeholders for Certification • Purchasers of usability services • Usability professionals • Usability aware employers • Entry level practitioners • Usability consultancies • Usability training organizations

5. Benefits A personal assessment of skills A guide for becoming a more skilled professional A part of a professional resume A part of a professional development plan or pay level used by organizations To establish the credentials of usability vendors/consultants Demonstrates the value of work to clients/customers Promotes professional excellence within the field Helps organizations understand the value of UCD and usability Drawbacks/Common Objections Competes with valid degrees Cannot guarantee quality work Can’t take real-world experience into account. Someone who is qualified might not “pass the test” for certification. Creates barriers to entry Adds costs and efforts without enough benefit Clients won’t know or care about it It would be better just to have a curriculum Will thwart innovation in methods BACKGROUND Benefits and Drawbacks to Certification

6. BACKGROUND Existing Certifications Title Sponsor Cost Comments Certified Usability Analyst HFI (Human Factors International) $4,280 • Commercial firm • No HF / related degree required • Take 4 courses + exam Certified Usability Specialist Weinschenk Consulting Group $8,650 • Commercial firm • No HF / related degree required • Take 1 4-day course + 4 days 1-on-1training Certified HF Professional Associate HF Professional Board of Certification in Professional Ergonomics $190 + $100 yearly • Professional services org. • Masters - HF, Ergonomics, related field • 4 yrs. experience in the field • Panel review + written exam Certified HF Engineering Professional Oxford Research Institute $300 +$60yearly • Professional services org. • BS+5 yrs; MA/MS+4 yrs; Ph.d+3 yrs. • Samples of 2-3 tech. contributions • Letters of recommendation • Written exam

7. BACKGROUND International Working Group • Working group formed at invitation of UPA and met in November 2001 in Salt Lake City • Goals: • Determine whether certification is viable • Survey members of key organizations to determine support for certification • Understand benefits and drawbacks seen by members • If usability certification is viable • Determine the criteria for certification • Determine the certification process • Determine the how certification should be administered • First meeting documented in article in Interactions • “CERTIFYING USABILITY (PROFESSIONALS): A Scheme to Qualify Practitioners” by Donald L. Day, Intuit (with the assistance of Nigel Bevan, Serco Usability Services). January-February 2002, page 7-9

8. United States Alan Colton, Surgeworks Donald Day, Intuit Julie Nowicki, Optavia Stephanie Rosenbaum, Tec-Ed Charlotte Schwendeman, Perficient Bill Saiff, Fannie Mae Eric Strandt, Northwestern Mutual Don Williams, Microsoft Larry Wood, Brigham Young University Whitney Quesenbery, Cognetics United Kingdom Nigel Bevan, Serco Usability Services Jonathan Earthy, Lloyds Register Caroline Jarrett, Effortmark Japan Masaaki Kurosu, NIME Organizations Represented UPA and UK UPA EC UsabilityNet Project British Computer Society HCI Specialist Group SIG Usability-Japan BACKGROUND Working Group Members

9. CURRENT ACTIVITIES Discussions within the Usability Community • SIGCHI (ACM’s Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction) • CHI 2002, Minneapolis, MN, April 20-25SIG: “A Proposed Scheme for Certifying Usability Practitioners” • UPA (Usability Professionals’ Association) • UPA 2002, Orlando, FL, July 8-12Workshop: “Certifying Usability Professionals: How Can Competence Be Assessed?” Panel: “A Proposed Scheme for Certifying Usability Practitioners” • STC (Society for Technical Communication) • 2002 Conference, Nashville, TN, May 5-8Panel: “Usability Professional Certification’ • HFES (Human Factors and Ergonomics Society) • BCS HCI (British Computing Society Human-Computer Interaction) • APCHI (Asia Pacific Computer-Human Interaction) • UK UPA (UK Usability Professionals’ Association) • IFIP Congress

10. Should there be a recognized accreditation scheme for UK usability professionals? What should the UK usability accreditation be based on? CURRENT ACTIVITIES No reply An international scheme in conjunction with US UPA to award UPA professional membership A stand-along UK scheme, leading to a UK qualification A less prescriptive scheme listing successful candidates on a web page (British HCI Professional) UK-UPA Survey

11. Online survey launched mid-April, 2002 Jointly sponsored by Working group The UPA Goals Gather input from the community on general opinions and specific issues Individual demographics Location Position and years of experience Degrees and certifications held Memberships Opinions about certification Agree/disagree with statements about benefits and drawbacks Favored process for certification Should a code of conduct be included Scope of certification Likelihood of seeking certification Opinions about governance Organization Connection to training courses Costs CURRENT ACTIVITIES SURVEY OF UPA, SIGCHI and Other Groups

12. APPROACH Types of Certification • Individual practitioner • Organization • Training courses

13. APPROACH General Approach to Certification • Scope includes entire user-centered design (UCD) field; not just usability testing and evaluation • The process should assess the candidate’s: • Knowledge • Skills • Usability aptitude • Certification process and criteria • Define a minimum standard • Inclusive rather than exclusive • Promote professional development and excellence • What it’s NOT: Small cadre of elite individuals • Process includes an ethical code of practice • Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice

14. APPROACH Concepts for Certification Process • Based on core competency + elective specialties • Points for: • Sufficient background / experience equivalent to a threshold score • Industry experience • University programs in HF and related fields • Work experience peer references • Possible process: • Submission of a brief describing the use of UCD on a project • How / why UCD principles / techniques were or were not used • Written exam • Problem solving style questions • Essay responses • Structured interviews with multiple assessors approved by the consortium

15. COMPETENCIES Certification Core Competencies • Based on ISO 13407, “Human-centred Design Processes for Interactive Systems” (1999): • Plan and manage the human-centered design process • Understand and specify user and organizational requirements and context of use • Produce design solutions • Evaluate designs against requirements • Builds on work done in UK and Europe • Technical Report: Technical Competencies for User-Centered Design Professionals

16. The SFIA is used as a model for structuring levels of competencies A common reference model for the identification of skills All skills mapped in two dimensions The complete IS model maps to a British Computer Society model Seven levels from trainee to mastery Each level has four dimensions Autonomy Influence Complexity Business skills Skills are defined to be comparable at each level Not every skill is practiced at each level COMPETENCIES range of skills authority and responsibility Skills Framework for the Information Age www.e-skillsnto.org.uk/sfia

17. COMPETENCIES Levels of Competency in the SFIA Level Status 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Follow Assist Apply Enable Ensure, advise Initiate, influence Set strategy, mobilize Student or Trainee Practitioner Professional

18. COMPETENCIES Definition of Level 4: Professional • Autonomy • Works under general direction within a clear framework of accountability. Substantial personal responsibility and autonomy. Plans own work, to meet given objectives and processes. • Influence • Influences team, and specialist peers internally. Influences customers at account level and suppliers. Some responsibility for work of others and allocation of resources. Participates in external activities related to specialization. Decisions influence success of projects and team objectives. • Complexity • Broad range of complex technical or professional work activities in a variety of contexts. • Business Skills • Selects appropriately from applicable standards, methods, tools. Demonstrates analytic and systematic approach to problem solving. Communicates fluently orally and in writing. Is able to plan, schedule and monitor work activities in order to meet time and quality targets. Is able to absorb rapidly new technical information and apply it effectively. Good appreciation of wider field and how it relates to the business activities of client. Takes some responsibility for personal development.

19. COMPETENCIES Technical Competencies 1. Plan and Manage the Human-Centered Design Process 2. Understand and Specify User and Organizational Requirement and Context of Use 3. Produce Design Solutions 4. Evaluate Designs Against Usability Requirements 5. Demonstrate Professional Skills

20. COMPETENCIES Draft Technical Competencies 1. Plan and Manage the Human-Centered Design Process • Competencies in this section demonstrate an ability to specify how human-centered activities fit into the system development process • 1.1 - Identify and plan stakeholder and user involvement • 1.2 - Select human-centered methods and techniques • 1.3 - Provide human-centered design support for other processes

21. COMPETENCIES Draft Technical Competencies 2. Understand and Specify User and Organizational Requirement and Context of Use • Competencies in this section demonstrate an ability establish the requirements of the user organization and other interested parties for the system, taking full account of the needs, competencies and working environment of each relevant stakeholder in the system. Identify, clarify and record the context of use in which the system will operate: • 2.1 - Clarify and document system goals • 2.2 - Analyze stakeholders • 2.3 - Assess risk to stakeholders • 2.4 - Identify, document and analyze the context of use • 2.5 - Define the use of the system • 2.6 - Generate the stakeholder, user and organizational requirements • 2.7 - Set usability objectives

22. COMPETENCIES Draft Technical Competencies 3. Produce Design Solutions • Competencies in this section demonstrate an ability to create potential design solutions by drawing on established state-of-the-art practice, the experience and knowledge of the participants and the results of the context of use analysis: • 3.1 Allocate functions • 3.2 Produce composite task model • 3.3 Explore system design • 3.4 Use existing knowledge to develop design solutions • 3.5 Specify system and use • 3.6 Develop prototypes

23. COMPETENCIES Draft Technical Competencies 4. Evaluate Designs Against Requirements • Competencies in this section demonstrate an ability to collect feedback on the developing design. This feedback will be collected from end users and other representative sources: • 4.1 - Specify and validate context of evaluation • 4.2 - Evaluate early prototypes in order to define and evaluate the requirements for the system • 4.3 - Evaluate prototypes in order to improve the design • 4.4 - Evaluate the system in order to check that the stakeholder and organisational requirements have been met • 4.5 - Evaluate the system in order to check that the required practice has been followed • 4.6 - Evaluate the system in use in order to ensure that it continues to meet organisational and user needs

24. COMPETENCIES Draft Technical Competencies 5. Demonstrate Professional Skills • Competencies in this section demonstrate an ability to enable HCD to be done in the organisation through working at a professional level: • 5.1- A degree of autonomy in the control of their own work. • 5.2- Having some influence on other people, a project or an organisation. • 5.3 - Cope with a degree of complexity (intricacy or complication) in their work. • 5.4 - Understanding of and skill in role within the working and professional environment

25. NEXT STEPS Possible Next Steps • Refine concepts based on feedback from these sessions • Complete competencies • Create draft of certification process • Create personas of different stakeholders • Create grand-fathering scheme • Develop governing body • Set up non-profit consortium • Obtain startup funding • Write informational material • White paper for standard responses to inquiries • Create scenarios using personas • Identify training to develop competencies • Develop model for HR departments

26. NEXT STEPS Governing Body • Consortium • Not-for-profit • International • Representatives of professional bodies • Representatives of major companies

27. Questions Ideas Suggestions or To-Dos