Hosted at Potato the focus of the talk was Security and Future Interfaces.
The speakers Adam Alton and Stu Cox from Potato spoke about their experiences of working with Google and creating secure digital products.
Firstly Adam and Stu set the scene by talking about Hacking, and how this as designers and developers we may not know how user will use the products we have designed and built. Using our products for something its not intended for. Wether this is White hat hacking or black hat hacking it’s important to understand where users may take your product.
As people within the industry it’s everyone’s responsibility to stop black hat hacking within our products with a moral obligation to keeps people data safe and to help build trust in our clients brands. With security starting at the ideas phase. Making sure that we cover what would happen if the product we built worked and then someone came along and used the service in a different way. E.g. Strava unknowingly showed the running routes that all american military bases. Not only that it can have a huge impact on the brands we work with, with an example being TalkTalk where 101,000 customs details were leaked. With the net result after fines and the loss in brand trust being a loss of £60m to TalkTalk. It was also found that out of the 101,000 customers that had their details leaked only 16,000 had their financial details hacked. Showing how a relatively small number of people can can their details stolen but the loss to the company can be massive.
Khalil Dimachkie came next from Smilepass talking about invisible interfaces. Talked out the technology their company are looking at with face recognition, saying he prefers this a security device over thumb prints saying thumb prints aren’t as succinct as people think they are. With the future being a combination of both face recognition as well as voice print biometrics. Saying how the industry is getting to the point where it can voice print one voice out of multiple voices in a room. Saying how Biometrics are helping users moving people away from something the user has to know and can forget to something you are, which requires less action from the user and eventually can be completely unobtrusive following the trend of how interfaces are gently falling away, with initially buttons, lights, switches moving to now where users have a blank glass slab to interact with. The next next step is to remove the glass slab.
Talking about users hacking face recognition he spoke how it will needs to detect scars, glasses, beard and aging and still recognising it is the same person. With the Intek camera he spoke how they stop hacking from masks or makeup as it can detect the blood that runs under the skin.
The biggest areas where he feels these types of interfaces will have an effect are within:
Finance – Interface will take time as it will be difficult to implement with the legacy systems in use.
Healthcare – Being able to checkin within the GP, reducing waiting times.
Transportation – Logistics companies. People moving through public transport, saving costs on staff and gates.
The final speaker from Liliana Kastilo from SYNK, came to talk about open source and how this can introduce risk within your code. She has found that with using open source most code used within projects today can be someone else’s. SYNK allows developers to review their code to see where vulnerabilities can be found within their pages.
Being hosted at Lloyds The UX crunch had 3 guest speakers tonight to talk through their experiences of working with IOT. Here we had Avril O’Neil Co-founder & creative director at Ding Products, Tim Dained UX & Service Designer, previously at Cambridge Consultants, and Priya Prakasha Founder of D4SC (Design for Social Change).
The first speaker Avril from Ding products talked about her company which have designed a doorbell that would allow the person at the door to be able to talk to the house owner, wherever they are in the world. Saying that they have met the gap in the market where people are time poor, and receiving more deliveries than ever.
Within the design process they started to produce lots of small physical props to allow them to see how people interact with their products, before moving into building working prototypes. After looking at their competitors they found the competition was very tech focused, so they wanted to corner the market where they can simplify the tech, creating the easiest of interfaces that people can relate to. One of the main problems they faced was making a coherent product in the box, but still suited the environment when in use.
One topic that was brought up was security, but Ding said that they have specifically marketed their product as not a security device, and will give instructions on how best to use the product when away from your house, for instance when the user is on holiday. It will be interesting to see in a couple of years how users view this product and if that means ding may have to change their thoughts on security
Talking after, Avril highlighted the areas that she thought are important when designing for IOT:
1. The importance of the physical interaction with the actual product.
2. The product must be necessary, so when the hype and excitement has has died down there is still a real need for the product.
3. To create an offline experience, making sure the product can still function when not connected, which can often go amiss with IOT.
The next speaker Tim Dained came to talk about his experience with IOT, within the medical sector. Tim began talking about the sector and how it’s an opportunity to create a more personal experience for patients and clinicians, but the complexities of healthcare system which is stuck in silos that don’t share info and knowledge between each other as well as being very hierarchical.
One of the main issues or questions his team asked themselves was how can they create connected systems where people can manage their disease and not the disease manage them. With IOT becoming the touch point but not the center of the products universe.
3 of the things he learnt whilst working within the healthcare system.
1. Getting healthcare stakeholder to design together.
Knowing how the product will scale once it is in the public domain.
2. Knowing what you want to do with the data.
Creating a user journey to map out where all the data layers start to interact with the product/user.
3. Taking device connectivity for granted.
The third and final speaker was Priya who came to talk to us about Design for social change.
Here she became very interested in the design of our streets and social management when she was involved in a cycle accident and took it upon herself to look at how she could start to change the streets for the better. One of the things she first noticed is that the design changes you make to people’s lives have to be done gradually referring how it is like training for a marathon, starting small and gradually increasing as the user learns and becomes more accustomed to the changes being made.
A talk that looked at the Italian car industry, with a first look at both the Automotive sectors in Italy and in the UK. Looking where the technology is taking the industry and the areas that may cause issue in the future, with an exhibition at the end ‘Ferrari: Under the skin’.
The roundtable discussions were moderated by Richard Charlesworth from Bentley. With the first looking at Engineering, development and production of vehicles in small series. With Danilo Lazzeri CEO of Blue Engineering, Glanluca Fomeris Cecomp Owner and Nick Carpenter, Director at Delta Motorsport taking the stand.
The second talk focused around Italian tradition and creativity in car and industrial design. Alessia Pirolo Italia Ambassador UK for Frangivento, Johann Lemercier Centro Stile Ferrari, Carlo Bonzanigo, Head of Design at Pininfarina, Fabrizio Giugiaro Founder of GFG Style, Louis Fabribeckers Head of Design at Touring Superleggera.
All going through their backgrounds from where they think the future is taking their perspective companies, with some good questions at the end where both Fabrizio and Carlo agreeing that the one car they most wished was one of their own being the DS19 Citroen (I think I need to learn more about car design).
It was very insightful hearing from Johann who is the Design Manager at Ferrari who talked about his background. Taking 8 years out to become a photographer before moving to Ferrari. He talked about the pressures he felt from being French and having to incorporate the history of not only Ferrari but Italian design into his teams work. He spoke about how as a team they spent a couple of years researching and building a design guideline for their cars, but in the end felt this can be quite constricting. Thinking that a Ferrari should be styled and built with the latest available technology that is available at that time, as well as saying that each car should be recognisably Ferrari without the badge.
Moving to a later discussion both Louis and Johann agreed how important agencies are, with Ferrari only just bringing design in house. This is to give a third eye and bring freshness into the designs. Talking from both Ferrari and Mini that inhouse designers and engineers who live and breathe their bands can sometimes not bring the freshness to their designs that they would like, also mentioning how 4 different projects that run simultaneously in house, and how eventually each car range will end up having similar ideas incorporated into them.
The panel also talked about their prototypes weather it is a concept for new technology or if it something to grow interest in the brand at the latest motor show.
With 3 guest speaker UX crunch organised a night to discuss the developing world of AI and how we design for interactions with this new technology. With Becky Priebe a Director of human Experience at RealWear, Alex Bone the Co-founder from Mettle Studios and Ben Scott-Robinson a founder at the Small Robot Company all talking about their experiences within this sector.
Becky Priebe came to talk about her experiences of being within the design industry at this time. With the sector constantly evolving and everyone be connected through information every second of the day.
She gave the analogy of how we as humans are set up in the same way as machines with sensors of smell sight touch taking data that our brain process this. But what does separate us from machines is emotion. And how we can learn about society, culture and how as designers we should be using our empathy to design ai to help users. Think about how people use a product to design the experience of ai. Here Becky stressing how the media portray AI as a product in itself, when actually it is a technology we should be applying to an experience.
Looking forward Becky talked about the what is starting to happen more and more, and this is how the industry is moving from designers working closely alongside developers to working next to data scientist making sure data come first and really determines what happens within design.
Alex Bone the Co-founder and Creative Director at Mettle studios came to talk about his experiences and perspective of being a practitioner of AI and data science. With his experience of iot he talked about machine learning and gave us insights into how artificial intelligence lacks in intelligence needing to be fed with information until it can become useful. Finding that users in general expect these products to be right straight from the offset, and didn’t understand the notion that these products having to analyse their data first.
An example of this is the Clean Space app (Where the user receives a clean mile credit depending on the mode of transport they have taken). His team had no baseline of data to start from, so they were struggling to know exactly when a person changes transport modes from walking to bus to cycling. The only way the team could do this was to go out and collect their own data, and then tagging in the right mode of transport. They found one person within in the team didn’t tag their journey, complaining that the app was never working correctly failing to understand that the app needed to be trained first.
Do Chevon from The Small Robot company came to talk about how they are using data and AI to transform farming. Looking at disrupting this market by reducing soil compaction. They have been able to design a service where they would lease out 3 different robots, Tom Dick and harry. That all have individual roles, from one looking at the current crop to see what pesticides are needed and whether they require it at all, to giving the farmer the exact position of each crop, to then helping plant each seed so that nothing is wasted. All without working or putting the same amount of pressure on the soil as current method, reducing the amount machines are compacting the soil which is a major problem to most farms around the country where the farms will have to allow around 5-8 years so that the ground can recover.
Week one opened with the 9 member sheepishly greeting each other and finding out about one another’s backgrounds, from Developers turned Designers, Marketing executives, and Graphic Designers all wanting to learn more about UX. The class size was a good number which allowed everyone to participate without feeling intimidated.
The first week run by Charlotte Gauthier the Lead UX Designer from The Guardian was focused around Human/User centred design. Starting by showing the various teams we would be working with throughout the course. Each team being split to give a wide range of backgrounds and experiences from the different participants. The first exercise was to decide a user-group that would benefit from a new email interface. A good range of ideas came forward, from a email interface focused on accessibility, to one focused on security which showed a good range of ideas within the groups.
Charlotte then focused the talk on what User research methods and processes were needed to validate the ideas. From Primary research, such as interviews, questionnaires and field studies, to Secondary research methods like benchmarking competitors and looking at previous studies. Then introducing us to tools like empathy maps, Persona cards and moving into NABC (Needs, Approach, Benefits, and Competition) that help make sense of the data gained.
Towards the end of the class we were separated back into our teams and given the brief for our course project, with the first week focusing on profiling our audience. With the ideas for the projects being a Healthcare app, a gardening tool, and ours a Trading skills app for the local community.
Week 2 – Ideation
Meeting with our teams again and exchanging notes on the week’s work, having found some useful information from interviews carried out during the week. With the Health care app being reminded of a old A-Z book that mums and dads would use to get quick medical knowledge. To understanding that an app that dealt with neighbours working together, would have to be careful to create respect within the app’s community, as to not create awkward relationships in the real world.
We were then greeted with our tutor for the next two weeks Hara Mihailidou who is currently Head of UX at Just Giving with a whole wealth of knowledge from experience at Microsoft and O2. Today we started to look at Ideation using a few techniques to develop the concept from week 1, ready to make a proposal that would be ready to pitch.
We were taught a number of great tools to use, that helped take the initial ideas and expand on them. The ones that sprung out to me included Journey maps, where you take a persona and map out the user’s day, helping to find where the situation would be useful for your users. With two others techniques that help take the idea and look at them in a completely different way, with ‘Creative Stimulus’ using ‘Revolution’ technique. Here you take the rules created from your original idea and reverse them to see if this leads to new ideas. Also another I particularly enjoyed was ‘Random links’ which allows you to stop getting bogged down within the project you may be working on. By bringing in a couple of random objects you would then discuss what they allow the user to do (anything is plausible), then taking these notes and relating each one back to the original idea.
Week 3 – User Experience, Sketching, and story boards
With the class being run again by Hara we all presented our final idea, giving a short explanation to how we got there. Within our team we had found that our initial idea was too broad to focus on within the time frame. Whilst also finding it would be very difficult to help mums and families because of the trust you need with the person may help with giving the kids a lift to school or babysitting. So we eventually settled on focusing on first time buyers and helping them with DIY tasks. It was good to see the other teams present and how their ideas had been developed into one pitch.
One learning from each of the groups pitch which seems obvious, was that we each forgot to give a quick story of the user and the specific problems they face, showing where our idea would help. With this in mind we moved into looking at our design goals, seeing the pyramid diagram from Stephen P Anderson who looked into the psychology behind design, moving your product from usable and reliable, to something pleasurable and meaningful, that will keep your users coming back time after time.
Hara then showing a great video from the master himself Don Norman. Looking at all the instances of designing fun into your products and what emotional cues the product should have to succeed, from Visceral, Behavioral, and Reflective.
We then came to one of the most enjoyable parts (for me) which was sketching, and creating storyboards, learning some quick techniques on how to quickly draw people to help get across the story we want to portray.
Using the personas that we first created in week one the teams drew out the storyboard that would show how our idea would intertwine into the user’s day and help them with their tasks.
Week 4 – Journey mapping, Information architecture and Wireframing sketching
Jiri the Principal Interaction Designer currently at Intruit was our tutor for week 4, bringing with him his experience from working for the Telegraph, National Rail Enquiries, among others.
Now with a true validated idea, from using the knowledge we have learnt from our user interviews we moved on to learning how we could start to structure the information we had gained, by looking into the Taxonomy and Information Architecture or our products.
The first activity of the night was to map out our user’s Journey using the storyboards and personas we had created from previous weeks. Quickly noting down all the activities our users would go through from initial problem to using our application. A great activity that really allowed us to dig into the detail of every process of our product. Then mapping out subtasks under the initial notes, reiterating the original line of activities as we went along. This flowed nicely into creating our User Flows, discussing as teams how the users would move around the activities and subtasks, learning that further Journeys could be made when wanting to dig into the detail of further subtasks.
Armed with the User Journeys and Flows, along with the work from previous nights, we moved into sketching out our wireframes. First working as a real rough Low fidelity hand sketch to get the ideas on page, allowing us to easily discuss what should be included and changed.
Before leaving, Jiri gave us the homework to the create a high fidelity wireframe prototype using proto.io along with a couple of useful links from BBC Gel, iOS HIG that look at existing patterns and design system that users already have a mental model of.
Week 5 – Prototyping and Rapid Experiments
I turned up early to see our tutor for the night Jiri grabbing a bite to eat before our class. It was good to get a quick chat with him before class, as we got to talk about how the academy was going and what my views on the class, along with getting a quick bit of advice over what I should emphasise within my CV and portfolio. With my background he mentioned I should focus on selling my experience from working with British standards to meet Ergonomic needs with the products I had worked on previously. Along with that he talked about his experiences when doing a masters, saying he thoroughly enjoyed it, and would still do it, despite the pressures of having a young family.
Moving onto the class we took a quick look at the wireframes we had produced using proto.io. Giving guidance on what areas we should adapt, opening it up to the whole group to ask questions. This then led us into the week’s topic of Prototyping.
First looking at the Double diamond diagram created by the Design council. Methodology suggesting that the design process consists of the 4 phases Discover, Define, Develop, Deliver. With Jiri saying that prototyping can fit within every phases as you look to evaluate your designs. Learning how Prototypes have many different guises and can be used to understand the problem space you are about to move. Showing examples of Rapid experiments where you jot down your interface on a piece of paper to test with a potential user. A very quick and easy way to test an assumption you might have.
Jiri started to go into detail of the various test he had carried out giving us lots of examples of Low fidelity test like sketches and dry tests where the prototype can be a creative piece that wouldn’t include any functionality to a ‘Wizard of OZ/ concierge’ test where a model is produced that allows the user to think they are using a real product. Jiri gave an example of a text based prototype where his teams created a text messages service where they would re-write the received messages from users before forwarding them, allowing them to test an idea quickly and the user thinking that everything was running through a database.
Another test that Jiri recommended was the diary study, getting users to use a prototype for a period of time whilst keeping a diary of when they used the product. This allows you to understand how the user gets on with a product over a longer period of time. What Jiri found most interesting was once the diary test had finished, they allowed the users to continue using the product. Although Jiri no longer got the the diary, the analytics they got back were quite interesting.
We then moved to a quick practical where we drew out and used paper prototypes to test quick interactions with our projects, which was a great way to imagine the steps the user had to go through to achieve a certain objective. Leaving this week with a couple of noteworthy comments ‘A prototype is worth a 1000 words’ and you should make a prototype in the lowest fidelity possible to answer the question you have.
Week 6 – Inclusive & responsive design
Today we met our 4th Tutor Sophie Lepinoy who is currently teaching Lean User experience and has mentored start up businesses at Google Launchpad. She came to give us an overview of what we should focus on with Accessibility and Inclusivity when designing for our users.
Sophie showing some insightful videos of people who are visually impaired, and what tools they use. Showing us how to consider the page is structured so that the screen readers can run through the page in a flowing manner. The video led the talk into the meaning of Accessibility as trying to remove barriers that stop people from using the website, which could be anything from visual impairment to hearing, which could be a physical problem to an environment problem of where the user is viewing your site/app. Then showing the certain standards that our designs should fall under such as the Equality Act 2010 along with the guidelines and associations which are good to keep in mind WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative), W3C (World Wide Web Consortium).
The next topic which Accessibility falls under was Inclusivity that can range from Language, Age, Education, communities and many more of what your users might be. This led to looking at our designs from ‘Stress Cases’. Where a product may be used in the wrong way. An example was given of a user asking Siri “Siri, I don’t know what to do, I was just sexually assaulted”, with Siri replying “One can’t know everything, can one?”. Showing how not thinking of all the ways a user could interact with your product, no matter how bad can lead to making a traumatic devastating event, even worse for the user.
The first exercise of the night was looking at the wireframes we have already created, and seeing how they should be restructured to include what we had learnt from the day’s session. This led our team to not only look at how the page should be restricted but how users may become vulnerable whilst using our app. Making us look at what safeguards we might need to be put into our design in certain steps of the process, such as pop up warnings, as well as directing people to connect with users they may already know through Facebook.
After a small break we started to look at responsive design and grid systems, looking at the differences between Native, hybrid and Web, from how to to pick your break point to choosing a responsive grid that would suit your site, mentioning it should be looking at your content and how it is viewed at various viewpoint sizes before setting your breakpoints. Sophie finished by giving us some great resources to help decide a grid and setting a task to adapt our mobile apps to desktop.
Week 7 – Validating with usability testing
Sophie set out the agenda for the night. Looking into Usability testing methods and techniques. First making us aware of how prototypes can save millions in industry. Really highlighting the need to test your assumptions before pushing them into the real world. Whilst showing how building up knowledge in the area to gain empathy with the core users, as without this our designs are pretty much wishful thinking.
First we looked at the initial research we needed to gather to help validate our idea. Taking the brief that came from the client and beginning to understand:
–the users situation,
–and their desired outcome.
To help learn what users are doing now to solve their problems. Showing the quote below:
“This is exactly why we do user research: to find out what people are doing now to solve their problem, understanding what needs they have, and to understand how we can best help meet those needs. Then it’s time to work out what the project should be”
The talk moved into giving us some useful research methods and questions that we could use, whilst also showing a few examples from the book Just enough research by Erica Hall
“A healthy team is made up of people who have the attitude that it is better to learn something than be ‘right’”.
Erika Hall, Just enough research
Moving towards user interviews where Sophie showed short video from the book Sprint by Jake Knapp, that showed Michael Margolis conduct a user interview about a fitness tracker. Picking out some of the key areas to keep in mind when conducting an interview, such as:
–Making the user at ease, and being conscious of your own body language and how this could affect the user whilst being fresh and enthusiastic,
–Start the interview by spending 10 minutes talking to the user and finding out about them.
– Make sure you listening and don’t interrupt and be appreciative showing your listening
– Ask the users questions, or ask where their thoughts may have come from, eg a past app they may have used.
–Make sure the user fully understands you are testing the product and not them
–Give the user certain tasks to complete.
–And finally finish with a quick debrief.
We then broke away for 20 minutes where we started to use the tools we had learnt that night to conduct our own interviews. First we decided on the user goal and what we might want to learn from the interview. Then turning these into tasks the users needed to complete and non-leading questions that meet the goals we set out.
Within the group one person interviewed a user whilst the rest of the group participated in note taking. It was good to learn this in a non pressured environment, and I immediately picked up some useful learnings, after committing the cardinal sin of jumping straight into the task, forgetting to learn about the user first. What was interesting was being able to see the problem and writing down the note just by seeing the movement of the mouse and the body language of the user even before they spoke themselves about the issue. Showing how important user interviews can be.
This leads us into the final week with some great feedback to add to further users tests carried outside of the academy to build upon our designs.
Week 8 – Stakeholder management and UX portfolios
Onto the final week, which was a fairly relaxed evening with Sophie filling in at short notice with the topic for the night being Stakeholder Management and Portfolios. Showing us how important it is to know who they are, what they want, emphasising the need to take these people with you whilst doing the project. Giving us a few key ways to keep people on board with workshops like Hackathons, Design sprints, and storytelling. Which all help to change attitudes in terms of how UX might be thought of in other parts of the business, with a major example coming from the book Sprint by Jake Knapp and Game storming by Dave Gray.
The talk then moved into how best to set up a portfolio, and how to use the work we had done throughout the course, and build a case study that would allow us to show the processes we have gone through when designing.
One of the best parts being right at the end where Sophie spent her time to have a look through the work we had produced over the last few weeks, as well guiding us on our online portfolios, giving us an insight into what employers are looking for, as well as a few pointers of what we should change. I found this a great part of the night getting great feedback in a non pressured environment and being able to chat openly with Sophie on ideas of how to adapt my site to best show off my work.
As the night came to a close a few of the students finished off with a couple of drinks with both Naveed and Sophie joining us, where we could talk about the academy and share ideas and what groups and events to join to continue learning.
As someone who has been a front end developer, and product designer I really enjoyed the 8 weeks, which seemed to go in a flash. My highlights definitely being able to sit down with the tutors on a one to one basis from getting thoughts on masters degrees, to usability tests. I think it’s great if you’re new in UX or a beginner, in giving you the right structure to follow or just cementing what you may already have learnt whilst at work. Although what I would say is you get out of the course as much as you are willing to put using the nights sessions as a way to give a direction to the work you do outside of the academy.
A definite highlight is the tutors who have amazing backgrounds in UX who give a great insight to what they have learnt over their careers as well as Naveed who makes you feel at ease and is more than willing to answer any question you have, and always looking at ways to see how he can improve the academy in the future.
Hosted at the Goldsmith center Farringdon, AKQA took a look at Data Science with three guest speakers each with a variety backgrounds within the industry, with Dr Rebecca Pope talking about how machine learning can make Healthcare more human, Dr J.Rogel looking at how the discipline interacts with different areas of the business, and Robin Houston showing us his work at KILN where he brings data to life with data visualisations.
Dr Rebecca Pope was very easy to listen to, and I would recommend checking out one of her TED talks. She first began speaking about machine learning giving us an introduction into how how this has quickly developed over the decades showing examples of a rudimentary design that flips burgers to Google’s DeepMind that built its own algorithm to get teh highest score playing a 1980’s video game.
A topic that was consistent throughout the talk was how media portrays that these machines will take human jobs, but Rebecca talked quickly to squash these, speaking about how our roles will change, but they will change by allowing us to do more interesting things rather than the mundane chores we have to do throughout the working day. This was the main topic of the talk, as we started to look at why this technology has taken traction in most industries with everyone having a Machine Learning tool in their pocket with their mobile phone, but has yet to take full traction within the Healthcare industry. There looked to be a few people within the room that were worried about how this could take jobs away putting further strain on the health care system, But Rebecca argued that Machine learning and AI would be used to sift through data, but you we wouldn’t be able to, or would want to teach them how to be emotive.
There are a few tools in the market that are looking to use the Data that comes through that allows users to treat themselves rather than having to wait to see the local GP such as Drayson [https://www.draysontechnologies.com/drayson-health.html]. The argument at the moment is that we have a very reactive healthcare system with issues only being looked at once an illness/ problem comes to the surface. Using data, the algorithms will be able to compare against similar people and find patterns, allowing some users to have preventative treatment whether this is through medication or lifestyle changes.
This led her explaining an example of how current GPs and opthamologist are overrun with very time intensive checks of looking at scans to see if there are any issues, and how people have to be treated on a first come first served basis not allowing for one person that might need treatment sooner than another. Machine Learning would be able go through the scans finding patterns and making sure that the people that needs the treatment can getthis right away reducing waiting lists, as well as freeing doctors time to allow them to do what they are good at, which is giving their human touch in treating people.
Robert Houston came to talk about his experiences of setting up his company KILN with his partner Duncan Clark. With their company they looked at how world is becoming more quantified and the importance of being able to interpret and display the results of the data we get. This is where https://www.kiln.digital/ would come in. Showing us how they have formulated data into amazing graphical pieces that can really get a point across. Showing something similar to what Han’s Rosling made famous.
An example can be seen in the Hans Rosling documentary for the BBC ‘The joy of stats’ which is well worth a watch. Where one graph shows the population size and compares against wealth and life expectancy across the world.
He then went on to showcase some of the work that their team have produced in the last 5 years, from showing the CO2 emissions from commercial shipping to flight paths over the last 100 years including some some gentle bits of humour from Edward Tuffy “The only thing worse than one bar chart is several.