Understanding the cultural, social, geographic, and other factors that influence technology adoption is essential to any
company that wants to succeed in developing useful technology products for diverse global markets. Dr. Genevieve Bell is
an anthropologist and the Director of User Experience within Intel’s Digital Home Group.
Comprised of social scientists, designers, researchers and human-factors engineers, the team is chartered with developing a
clear and actionable understanding of people’s everyday domestic practices around the world. In conducting their fieldwork,
the team applies a variety of ethnographic and other social science and design research tools and techniques, from in-depth
interviews, to story-boarding, and observations of people as they go about their daily routines. The team uses the insights
gleaned through fieldwork to help influence, shape and drive product offerings, technology developments, strategic directions
and investments across several of Intel’s business units with a particular focus on the home.
Q. How is ethnographic research used at Intel?
Ethnography is a branch of anthropology that uses techniques, critical methodologies and ways of thinking to understand human
cultures. The goal of ethnographic research at Intel is to bring the human component into discussions about technology. Intel
relies on ethnographic studies to drive innovation in its product lines and in its thinking—we help bring a broader understanding
of consumers and their every day practices to the company.
Q. We are beginning to hear a lot about new usage models for
the digital home that will revolutionize the TV experience for consumers. Do these trends pose any questions for the industry?
It is quite clear, as we look around the world, that we are in the midst of sudden and rapid growth of digital content in our lives.
New emerging consumer electronics devices promise to be smart enough to let us download the special content we want, display our
digital photos, surf the Internet, buy products and carry on text chats and video-enhanced phone conversations with friends and family.
But we need to ask ourselves, do consumers really want to do these things? How will they actually integrate these new devices and
content into their daily lives? And perhaps more fundamentally, we also need to ask the question—is there any disconnect between the
prevailing vision of the digital home and the realities of life at home around the world?
The answers to these questions will be profoundly important for the consumer electronics industry, service providers, advertisers and
content producers. The industry needs to distinguish between the digital home as a rallying cry for the industry versus how we actually live.
Q. In what sense is the digital home a rallying cry for the industry?
I think when we talk about the digital home, we aren’t really talking about particular homes or even our own homes. We are instead
talking about vision— a rallying cry if you will. Something to motivate and drive the industry forward; in some ways, something bigger
than any of us can be, almost a little unattainable. Think about NASA and the push to get someone on the moon. President Kennedy’s
rallying cry to place astronauts on the moon and return them safely to earth by the end of the decade was bold and ambitious and profoundly
motivating. While that goal was met, only a handful of astronauts actually made it to the moon. The real value for most of us comes from the
wave of technological innovation triggered by the Apollo program and by the ways in which it created a sense of what could be possible.
In a smaller way, much closer to home, many of us should remember the vision of the “paperless office” that so dominated conversations about
new technology in the 1980s. It helped drive all kinds of new technologies, things that we consider almost indispensable now. But paper did not
go away—far from it—we have arguably more paper in our lives now than we did 30 years ago. But the vision of the paperless office helped galvanize
people and create a direction and drive that resulted in a wave of new digital devices and usage models that revolutionized the way the world does business.
I believe the “digital home” could be a similar rallying cry for the consumer electronics industry and beyond—it could be a vision, a goal. If we
think about it that way, we are also not confused about the ways in which daily life is already happening and homes are already inhabited and even
in some ways “digital”!
Q. Can you describe how the User Experience Group is helping ground the conversation in daily life?
To find out how we actually use our TVs, members of the User Experience Team have been doing research in many homes around the world. We have been
exploring the ways in which TV is understood by consumers, by real people, not as a 10’ user interface but as a part of their homes and their
lives. Specifically we have looked at the value of the TV experience as a cultural object in China, India, the United States and the United Kingdom.
Our ethnographic researchers visited people in their homes and spent time with them, observing when the TV is turned on, where it is located in the
home, where it gets its content, and how people formed emotional connections to the TV. We were interested in how people talked about and used their TVs.
Q. What have you discovered?
Our findings show, at the broadest level, something many of us knew intuitively—people love their televisions. In many different cultures, in many
families, TVs emerged as a beloved, if not sometimes annoying, companion, friend, and constant in the home. Wherever we live, TV content engages us
at an emotional and visceral level—it is more than simply entertainment, it is about a kind of engagement and about nurturing us as people. TV has
our stories, and the characters become extensions of our families. The irony is that while the industry tends to talk about new technology, consumers
want to talk about their family, their constant companions, and the comfort and nurturing that TVs bring. To avoid unintended consequences, we as an
industry must learn to listen to people, and to be clear about their perspectives.
We need to be clear about the single purpose of an object—why people use it, care about it, desire it, buy it and keep it. The lesson here is not to
be seduced by the impulse to increase the number of things any piece of technology can do, or to confuse its purpose with the functions it could
incorporate. We must be very careful to identify the purpose of CE devices from a consumer perspective. It would be bad if we broke what people
liked most about the television experience. In making consumer electronics devices smarter for instance, potentially increasing their number of
functions and features, we should also keep their purpose in mind.
Violating this principle is a recipe for disaster.
Q. What advice do you have for the industry?
My advice is simple—genuinely get to know your audience, and what they care about, know what they are doing with their TVs and connected devices,
and most importantly, how they feel about those activities and those devices!
Enjoying TV is a user-friendly experience. There is a button for turning the TV on and a button on the remote for changing channels. When you plug
in a DVD player, it just works. And even as the variety of available content expands, many people continue to prefer their content pre-packaged.
Relaxing on something comfortable (a sofa, a chair, a cushion on the floor) and simply watching TV with your family, with your friends, even alone,
has been the dominant usage model for almost 60 years. We have maintained this trajectory, despite the evolution of TV from black-and-white sets
with rabbit-ear antennas to today’s HD flat-panel TVs with digital set top boxes that can access a diverse menu of cable, satellite and
direct-broadcast content. So clearly there is something about it that works, that satisfies and pleases people.
Evolving the TV experience along this same trajectory makes a lot of sense. Stepping off this trajectory and effectively “breaking” the
TV would certainly not. Our challenge is how to make the TV better, how to make it even more the object and experience that people love—make the TV
even more TV-like.
So while as an industry we are clearly thinking about making CE devices smarter, we also have to think about how to preserve the simple joy of the
television experience. I believe this could include:
- Creating genuine plug-and-play for all CE devices, especially those that connect to the TV
- Eliminating the tangle and clutter of wires, cables and plugs that plague anyone who cares about the aesthetics and style of their principal social spaces
- Making the interface and the remote control less complicated and more comfortable
In short, we need to work together to make tomorrow’s TV experience smart enough to be simple.