One Account Login with Roles

People have a hard time keeping track of all the user name and password combinations they have across web sites. Why would you compound their struggle by forcing them to have multiple logins to your site for different functionality? You wouldn't. Give them a single log in and control access to various functions and permissions using roles. The goal? Elegant ease of use.


My real world experience with this happened about 7 years ago when I was supporting a couple of continuing education software programs and helping to architect the company's next fully browser based version. 

The existing two products had web class registration access for students, with limited instructor and staff web access.  My support duties meant I dealt with continuing education staff who often were also students of classes, as well as served as instructors.  This meant they potentially had three separate accounts in the system. This also meant they had to recall three separate user/password combinations, and that was just in a single system. I understood their frustrations.

The response as I listened and helped them was to suggest we develop the new system with a single user account that that was role based.  Each account would start off with the default role of student. Once the account was created, the system administrator could add and remove other roles such as staff, instructor, firm contact. Those additions and removals would allow role specific system permissions to be set, trigger password resets,  account confirmations, or prompt for new required fields to be filled, etc.

The goal being to make it so users only had to remember one login/password combination for the entire system, and at the same time help the system administrator keep better track of access, preferences, and permissions for staff, instructors, firm contacts, students.

Focus on making it elegant for the users.  It's an effort that's well worth it.

Happy to be Simply a Customer

I'm a customer and I want to be valued and treated like one.  Our interaction occurred because I needed or wanted a product or service that you offer.  I paid you. If I have a issue with your service or product I expect easy access to a direct and responsive communication channel to resolve them with you.

By default I'm not part of your "<insert company or product> community".  Despite your effort to redefine the term, that's not communities work.  Again, if our seller/buyer interaction was satisfying for me I'm completely happy being simply a customer

I also don't want you emailing me asking if I can help answer other potential customers questions for you, review things, or otherwise do your sales job for you.  That would be similar to the local grocery store asking me to assist others with their self checkout because I've used the self checkout successfully and now have been declared to be part of the "grocery buying community".

Again, I'm very happy to be simply a customer.  Value me as one.

Software is a Tool

Software, in all forms, is a tool.  It's that simple. It's frustrating to read and hear declarations insisting "software is an experience!".

You have an experience using it, but it is not an experience itself, it's a thing that a person utilizes to get something done.  Its function and interface design can make that use a positive or negative experience, a productive or wasteful experience. Either way, the software itself is only a tool, a poor or well crafted tool.

Software itself is no more of an experience than the wrench you use to turn a 1/4" bolt is "an experience". The wrench design attributes are only part of an experience, as well as many other factors.  Is the bolt head rounded?  Is the bolt thread-locked or rusted?  Is the bolt head in a place it's hard to get your arm, your hand?  Are you working outside in the heat, the cold, etc?  Those elements as well as the wrench make up the experience, but the wrench alone is not the experience, the wrench is simply a tool.

Software developers need to prioritize designing great software tools that most efficiently and elegantly serve the purpose of getting something accomplished.  When they do that they are more likely to create software tools that consistently become a part of a good use experience.

Those Who Do vs Those Who Do Talking

I read yet another so-called social media marketer's three sentence blurb accompanying their link to someone elses article stating "Showing that you are listening to customers will make your customers and potential customers very loyal."

Close, but not quite there.

Actually listening to your customers is the key.  It's not wearing it on your sleeve that you should be attempting to do. You should put your energy into actually listening to your customers, and responding where it’s appropriate. Period.

Doing so you'll not only have a product that better fits the needs of your current and future customers, you'll also have happier customers.  If you walk it instead of focusing on showing it, and do something special, true, and honest, people will talk about you. They may, or may not, do the talking using your favorite buzzword social media outlet, but I guarantee they'll communicate in person with their industry cohorts at conferences and meetings, in emails, and on the phone if you’re authentically helping them achieve their goals.

Google Play Music Silo?

Google, when I access Google Play you should be able to look at the hundreds of albums I've pushed up to my music cloud and eliminate those that I already possess from your advertising sections.

Google Play Music shouldn't be a silo.
 
Today I have the Make-Out Music section at top. Scrolling through the albums in that section I see several albums I already own and have in my Google Play Music library. Wouldn't that space be better used to present other albums to me?

At a minimum, the ones already up in my cloud library should get a check mark like you do with apps and books, when I see them in the Play store.

There's always room for improvement, even for people who do computing that often makes me say, "That's so cool."

Thanks,
Brian

You say "exploit" I say "follow"

How DARE corporations use the loopholes lawmakers politicians created. I'm not even an Apple fan, but if it's a loophole in the law, isn't it more accurate to say 'following' the law instead of 'exploiting'?  Nice attempt at throwing the public 'Eye of Sauron' elsewhere.

I know, small government fans, you were expecting Apple representatives to be walking the streets handing out cash along with hugs, and are heartbroken and shocked that you haven't seen them yet. :-|

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57585449-37/lawmakers-lambaste-apples-tax-strategy-as-outrageous/

...because computing is F-U-N!

It's things like this humorous Google legal warning that makes me want to work there, and puts a smile on my face.

 http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57575277-93/chromebook-pixel-legal-warnings-show-sense-of-humor/

If anyone and Google, or Google venture capital, ever wants to fund or hire me to help them build an adult education/continuing education registration software email me.  Until then, thanks for the smile.

- Brian