User Experience As Legitimacy Trap

What I read

In this short article, the author presents a framing for how professions emerge and then become "locked in" to a way of being and being considered. This has occurred in HCI, where the field has become more closely trapped in user experience, rather than nurturing and sustaining human dignity and flourishing.

The author describes the basis for the article, which was a discussion at a conference addressing the question "What comes after HCI?" The legitimacy trap is introduced as a phenomenon where a profession emerges and, after those in that profession argue for and gain recognition as being valuable, becomes entrenched and difficult to then change. This is illustrated by means of example: human resources emerged in the 80s and the profession became known for its role in compliance. Attempts to then recast it as a strategic competency were met with obstacles.

HCI faces a similar legitimacy trap. The profession "staked its own legitimacy in the corporate domain on the value of usability," and as interactive systems have become more prominent, this now drives the idea that HCI contributes to the creation of delightful user experiences. This now traps the profession. The author explains that the "central charge to HCI is to nurture and sustain human dignity and flourishing," and this has always been part of the role of the discipline—one can see this in Engelbart's work, the original Macintosh, and Scandinavian participatory design. This is a different legitimacy, and is less compatible with current user experience practice, and practitioners are now "on the wrong side." This is because we did not argue for this legitimacy, and those ideas are now outside of our purview. Instead, making things is now our legitimacy claim, and people are no longer at the center; this discounts the ability for things like the social sciences to claim a primary role.

The author indicates that there is no easy way to escape this legitimacy trap, but there are some approaches that can be used. The profession can engage in discussion to identify what to pursue instead, and can work to "see human dignity and human flourishing as central."

Brief Critical Discussion

The legitimacy trap is an effective way of thinking about the introduction of something new that has advocates and an audience (and the audience may be ignorant, or scared, or ambivalent.) Gaining legitimacy means making persuasive arguments, and it erodes legitimacy to then claw those arguments back. HCI, or design and technology, has attempted to recast itself many times; one is, as the author describes, shifting from usability to a role in shaping digital consumer products. Another has been the attempt to bring user experience to the metaphorical "table"—the corporate space where large-scale strategy is set. The author is making a case to reclaim and recast human computer interaction around issues of social justice, and argues that this is one of the original ideas behind "user-centeredness." This argument is grounded in several examples, including the work of Engelbart and the development of the Macintosh; these may not be familiar to a reader, and the leap isn't necessarily made clear. The view of the Mac operating system as a form of human empowerment is specifically a reach, as its positioning was around "user-centered," but these gaps don't detract from the overall argument—that the field has essentially gotten away from itself, and requires a reclaiming.

There's not a clear set of actions or next steps provided, which is the point: there's no easy way to escape the legitimacy trap. It may be worth letting go of HCI and user experience, and claiming the exploration of technocentricity as a part of the social sciences instead.