Future mobility systems will likely incorporate more multimodal journeys. These multimodal journeys integrate multiple modes of transport, and their higher future prevalence highlights the importance of paying attention to the modality transfers within journeys. To carefully facilitate these transfers, we advocate the creation of passenger-oriented Multimodal Transport Hubs (MTHs), which integrate both infrastructure and services of multiple travel modalities to ensure high-quality transfers between the different modes of transport. This study is part of a research project investigating how Airport Hubs can transform into MTHs and aims to learn in practice how the case study FlyHub deals with new travel modalities and how FlyHub integrates these into its ecosystem. Through the presence of an embedded researcher in the case study context, performing the explorative pre-step of the Action Research approach, the study builds an understanding of the context and the rationale for possible succeeding cycles of action and research. Accordingly, we identified five themes that either stimulate or thwart the transition of FlyHub into an MTH. The five themes are 1) recognition of the importance of innovation and long-term outlook, 2) limited exploration possibilities, 3) the MTH concept being (too) abstract, 4) multi-system transition going slow, and 5) changes and transitions being a struggle for power.@en

Developments in sustainability and digitisation outline a future of mobility, with multimodal transport becoming the new normal. Travel modalities will no longer be the focal point of mobility, but passenger experiences and the services that provide these will. In a mobility landscape where the passenger experience is key, and multi-leg trips are the norm, Multimodal Transport Hubs are essential players as they can facilitate high-quality intermodal transfers. However, this advanced application of Multimodal Transport Hubs does not yet exist in practice. By employing a scoping review, this research aims to investigate the position of airport hubs as Multimodal Transport Hubs in the future of mobility, as airport hubs physically unite several transport infrastructures but only offer transfers with high-quality services within air traffic and not – to, from and between other modalities. To become future-proof, airport hubs should transform into truly Multimodal Transport Hubs that provide transfers with high-quality services from at least ultra-long to long and medium-range modalities. However, airport hubs have features such as a complex stakeholder landscape, long development times, reliance on transport operators and uncertainty about the added value of integrating new travel modalities that make modality innovation at airport hubs a systemic design challenge. This research identified a lack of theoretical knowledge regarding harnessing and integrating alternative and new modalities at airport hubs to transform them into fully integrated Multimodal Transport Hubs. In particular, how to assess and select new and alternative modalities, how to determine the appropriate level of engagement in different stages, and how to integrate new modalities at airport hubs should be investigated in future research.@en

The boundaries between collective and individual transport are fading. Current solutions for payment and planning of trips are suboptimal for journeys that span across individual, collective and shared transport modalities. The discussion around these innovations often tends towards public authorities needing to strengthen their integrating role, or towards the private companies developing key innovations. We argue that focusing on only one of these perspectives, either integration or innovation, is likely to lead to what we call ‘subtopias’. Furthermore, we discuss and resolve the conflict between the two roles based on four different scenarios, ranging from nightmare to utopian dream. Our claim is that a balance is needed between, rather than a prevalence for private and public, for integrated and innovative mobility services to manifest themselves. As we see it, authorities will need to direct, harmonize and coordinate specific elements of personal mobility systems in order to be able to facilitate a seamless multi-modal mobility experience for travelers.@en

In a case study of the development of three electronic consumer products, we traced the origins of usability issues. Based on the data collected, an initial, explanatory framework was induced of important drivers of usability in product design. We conclude that – while usability methods mostly focus on gaining knowledge about users and usability issues – in many instances the primary cause of usability problems seems to be a lack of design freedom to implement usability-improving design changes. In addition, the organisational context seemed to influence the design process considerably. Thus, it can be concluded that to conduct user-centred design effectively, the design process should be considered holistically and the organisational context should be taken into account.

@en

"Eenmansconsumentenbond' Jasper van Kuijk bespreekt al jaren slecht ontworpen producten en diensten. In zijn populaire Hoe moeilijk kan het zijn?-columns in de Volkskrant maakt hij duidelijk wat er mis is gegaan bij het ontwerpen en welke ontwerpprincipes hieraan ten grondslag liggen en hádden moeten liggen. In Ligt het nou aan mij? fileert Van Kuijk nieuwe gebruiksproblemen en geeft hij heldere (en pijnlijk grappige) analyses. Het boek is voorzien van illustraties en de stukken zijn ingedeeld en ingeleid per categorie (bijvoorbeeld "thuis', "zakelijk bekeken', "kinderen' en "openbaar vervoer'), waardoor er een goed beeld ontstaat van de specifieke ontwerpuitdagingen. Een gebruiksaanwijzing vooraf: het lezen van dit boek gaat vergezeld met het nodige leedvermaak en opgetrokken wenkbrauwen. En een grote geruststelling: nee, het ligt (waarschijnlijk) niet aan jou. Jasper van Kuijk is cabaretier, columnist voor de Volkskrant en Radio EenVandaag, ontwerper én wetenschapper (universitair hoofddocent gebruiksgerichte innovatie aan de TU Delft). Een druk bestaan, maar de constante factoren zijn zijn vlijmscherpe analyses en een aanstekelijk gevoel voor humor.@en

This study identified practitioner-reported barriers to and enablers of usability in the development of electronic consumer products. Barriers and enablers are properties, situations, or conditions in the product development process, team, or context that negatively or positively influence the usability of a product. Based on a review of literature on user-centered design and exploratory expert interview, central concepts for studying usability in practice were identified. This was used as input for the case study, which was conducted at 5 product development groups in large multinationals, making (a) portable audio/video players, (b) personal navigation devices, (c) cell phones, (d) laundry care products, and (e) home control products. Data were primarily collected through interviews with 31 product development practitioners. Based on the data collected, case descriptions were created and more than 1,500 barriers and enablers were identified, categorized, and analyzed. The results of the study are 23 sets of barriers and enablers, of which it is indicated in which of the cases they occur, and accompanied with illustrative quotations from the interviewees. In barriers and enablers, a predominantly “outside–in” relation was observed, from the more external properties of companies (market, company organization) to the more internal (process, team, project). This seems to indicate that the user-centeredness of a product development process is highly influenced by the context in which it is executed. The results also lead to the conclusion that if the goal is to make usable products, one cannot only address activities that are generally considered typical of user-centered design, such as conducting user research and user testing. One also has to take into account how these activities are integrated with and supported by the rest of the product development process, which in turn has to be supported by the product development organization.@en

Of het nu gaat om rookmelders, ov-fietsen, beamers of de stiltecoupé: sommige producten wil je omhelzen en andere het raam uitgooien. Maar hoe komt dat? Het is vaak lastig er de vinger op te leggen; je kunt de kwaliteit van een ontwerp namelijk niet (alleen) beoordelen op het uiterlijk. Eigenlijk zoals je ook een boek niet moet beoordelen op basis van het tekstje achterop. Met een aanstekelijke mix van ironie en absurdisme verwoordt Jasper van Kuijk de principes, uitdagingen en valkuilen van het creëren van nieuwe producten. Aan de hand van vele herkenbare voorbeelden laat hij zien dat ontwerpen een complexe bezigheid is, waarin men ondanks de beste bedoelingen verrassend vaak kan verdwalen. Maar juist die missers brengen waardevolle inzichten aan het licht en maken dat je meer waardering krijgt voor geslaagde ontwerpen. Met Hoe moeilijk kan het zijn? wijst Van Kuijk de weg naar een gebruiksvriendelijkere, intuïtievere en beter ontworpen wereld.@en

This study explored how usability was dealt with in four product development organizations active in different sectors: high-end automotive, professional printers and copiers, office coffee makers and fast moving consumer goods. The primary differentiators of the selected cases were whether they were targeting businesses or consumers and the degree of product complexity. Interviews with 19 product development practitioners were conducted, focussing on three topics: 1) the product development process and the integration of user involvement, 2) multidisciplinary teamwork, and 3) organizational attitude towards usability. Based on the interviews, context descriptions of the companies were created and barriers and enablers for usability were identified. To verify the findings and to discuss remaining issues a feedback workshop was held in which the primary contact from each company participated. The results indicate that differences in product–market combination lead to differences in organizational attitude towards usability. The prioritization of usability in an organization seems to be influenced by the degree of product complexity (complex products are more prone to suffer from usability issues) and whether developers think that usability is a purchase consideration for their clients. The product–market combination a company targets also affects the methods for user-centred design that a company can apply and that are relevant. What methods for user-centred design are used also seems to be influenced by the attitude towards usability: if usability is considered more important, methods that require more resources can be applied.@en