| Home | Software Providers | Consultants | Articles | Columns | Reviews | Headlines |

-

Entire contents Copyright © 1999 Business Insurance

"'User-friendly' programs; How to find products truly made with the user's needs in mind"
Business Insurance, September 21, 1992

by David Tweedy

ANYONE WHO HAS BEEN remotely involved with a computer has heard the oft-used and much maligned term ''user friendly.'' It is yet another buzzword the computer industry has unleashed on us.

Yet, it is a critical term because it has to do with how easy a software program is to learn to operate and, most importantly, to amend.

User friendliness is important to the risk management professional in using risk management information systems (or any other information system, for that matter).

To more practically illustrate and explain this topic, I have asked a real expert, Rick Hoehne, president of Paradigm Infosystems of Bothell, Wash., to comment.

Mr. Hoehne's company produces an RMIS that is among the most user-friendly systems available because it is developed for the Apple Macintosh environment, which has long recognized the importance of ease of use as it relates to productivity.

First of all, how do we define user friendliness? Unfortunately, this is very subjective and should not be taken at face value.

Just like all insurance programs are ''extremely competitive and comprehensive,'' so all risk management information systems and software packages claim to be user friendly.

But your definition and my definition of user friendly may be miles apart. Indeed, in Betterley Risk Consultants' review of major RMIS vendors, we have a rating category called ''User Friendly,'' but it is based on the user's perceptions and experiences, as well as observed demonstrations of the software in relation to others.

Mr. Hoehne says a better term would be ''user centered/focused.'' That means that the entire focus of the system and its operation is centered around the user and how he thinks and operates.

In other words, the end-user can focus his thoughts on what he wants to accomplish and not on how to accomplish it. It also means that the programmer of the software considered what the end-user wanted and needed, rather than what the computer required.

From here, we should move on to another frequently used and abused term, ''interface.''

By definition, an interface is a point of connection between two objects. With computers, this is the connection made between the user and the software. This is where user friendliness becomes important, because without an effective interface a well-designed system with excellent features loses its ability to provide benefits to the end user, especially when that person is not computer literate.

Traditional user interfaces had been based on grids of rows and columns with letters, numbers and symbols occupying spots within this grid. Programmers were limited to this format in displaying the information to the user.

However, advances in technology have resulted in graphical user interface.

According to Mr. Hoehne, a true graphical user interface ''is not constrained by the traditional row-and-column grid approach. With the advent of GUIs, the concept of user-friendly has become more prevalent as developers can tailor the interface to match a user's expectations.''

Such was the history with Apple as, in 1984, the Macintosh computer system was introduced, bringing GUI interfaces into the limelight.

Unfortunately, no standards for user friendliness have been established by the computer industry.

Mr. Hoehne notes, ''Therefore, software firms can call virtually any system 'user friendly' and get away with it.''

Returning to the intent of user friendliness, Mr. Hoehne uses another term of importance: intuitive processing.

This is a concept in which the user can ''logically approach a computer screen and intuitively reason what tasks can be performed or how to perform them. If the user must look to a book or a code sheet, he is spending time figuring out how to perform the task, and not performing the task itself. By definition, this reduces productivity,'' he says.

What are good examples of intuitive processing? For anyone familiar with either the Macintosh operating system or the Microsoft Windows programs, the answer is obvious. These two environments utilize icons of tasks, rather than cumbersome computer syntax, such as would be found when working in a disk operating system (DOS) environment. An example would be an icon that looks like a printer that the user clicks with a mouse, rather than pressing a function key. Function keys are not intuitively obvious.

Mr. Hoehne describes several ways to determine how user-friendly a system or software package is:

• Does the system/software package use icons to provide aid to the end user? A picture of a printer that is selected with a pointing device (like a mouse) is more intuitive than hitting the F8 function key to print a file.
• Are all available system functions visible at all times? Commands that are not available should be highlighted in such a fashion that the user knows the function cannot be performed. This is another advantage of the Macintosh or Windows environment. The commands are always visually available.
• A system should only present the user with functions, data fields, layouts, etc., that apply to what the user needs to do.
  
  For example, says Mr. Hoehne, ''When entering a claim, if you select a claim to be medical only, you should only have the fields applying to a medical-only claim on the screen and not the fields which apply to a lost-time claim.''
  
  Input screens that collect all types of information, rather than specific information, are not user friendly, confusing the issue even further.
• Does the system provide a clear indication of all the tasks you could perform by looking at the screen information?
  
  Mr. Hoehne comments: ''Can you execute these tasks directly from the screen, or do you have to exit the area and access another area of the system? Is it intuitively obvious how to access the other parts of the system?''
  
  Obvious areas to look at include the ability to:
  Set reserves from the check input screen.
  Add a new service provider from any screen in the system.
  Access the diary system from any point in the system.
  Access a claim record when looking at a diary event.
  Print what appears on the screen, even if the layout is larger than the screen itself.
• Examine a records detail from a display list (body part, cause code, provider list) when entering information.

This really gets to the logic of the system design. Another way for characterizing this logic are features known as navigation, pop-up screens and pull-down menus.

Navigation is the logical ability of a user to work his way through the system without having to check a user manual. The screen and the commands listed give enough information for even the novice user to go through the process of, for example, entering claim information, setting up a reserve, paying a provider, changing a reserve or processing a subrogation claim.

The pop-up screen and pull-down menus are devices, using the mouse or keyboard, to access additional information while you are going through a series of screens. For example, when entering claim information, you may not know the different types of injury codes that are available to you without looking at a manual.

A pop-up screen would show you a separate directory of all body parts that are logical to use in this particular claim.

The pull-down menu is another device that promotes efficiency and ease of use. When paying for a claim, for example, a pull-down menu could identify the type of payment: is it medical only or is it lost time; is it an expense-related check, does it go to a specific provider?

In my next column, I will discuss how the system user can quantify how user-friendly the system really is by comparing features and implementation.

Copyright© 1992 Business Insurance