161
Supporting Consistent Design
to a range of benefits, including increased usability, ease of learning and reduced
errors ( Nielsen, 2002). These benefits increase with the number of systems that
apply the same design principles. Although the benefits of consistent design are
well known, current maritime design approaches and regulations have not managed to realize the full potential of consistent design. Overall, we argue that each
of the individual approaches above have shortcomings and will likely not lead to
design consistency alone. Instead, there is a need for a combined approach. Below
we describe four design approaches and analyse how they impact the push towards
design consistency.
PreScriPtive ruleS
Prescriptive rules and guidelines specify in detail how a product or system should
be designed. This may include detailed design guidance of elements including, font
sizes, icons characteristics and specific functions applications must deliver. In the
maritime domain, there are both mandatory prescriptive rules and non-mandatory
prescriptive guidelines for design. A limitation of prescriptive rules is that they are
typically established from prior experiences and thus may have inherent biases in their
scope and content. Prescriptive rules related to engineering and t echnology-related
fields are also challenging due to the rapid evolution of contemporary technological
advancements. By the time the need for prescriptive rules are identified, developed
and released, the applications the rules were originally intended for may have less
relevancy or suitability. Currently, there does not exist prescriptive regulation in the
maritime sector that defines user interfaces at a level that may lead to digital design
consistency. The current rules manage some aspects of central applications, such as
ECDIS; however, none offer detailed specifications of user interface design.
goal-baSeD ruleS
Goal-based rules and guidelines define what a system should achieve, instead of how
it should be designed. These guidelines are useful in establishing high-level goals
( e.g. SOLAS chapter V/ 15 [International Maritime Organization, 2009]); however,
it is difficult to achieve consistent design using g oal-based rules, since a goal can
be achieved in many different ways, through many different solutions. Although it
is possible to mandate that a system should be designed consistently, it is difficult to
realize this in multivendor ecosystems, where many systems are developed independently by independent actors. As a result, a goal-based rule approach for realizing
consistent design may work within a single company or group of collaborating companies, but it is likely to fail when systems are designed and integrated by several
competing companies.
manufacturer controlleD conSiStency
Typically, larger vendors who control the design of an entire ship’s bridge deliver the
most consistently designed systems in the maritime sector. These companies may
achieve consistency across a single ship’s bridge or several ship bridges by controlling
Supporting Consistent Design
to a range of benefits, including increased usability, ease of learning and reduced
errors ( Nielsen, 2002). These benefits increase with the number of systems that
apply the same design principles. Although the benefits of consistent design are
well known, current maritime design approaches and regulations have not managed to realize the full potential of consistent design. Overall, we argue that each
of the individual approaches above have shortcomings and will likely not lead to
design consistency alone. Instead, there is a need for a combined approach. Below
we describe four design approaches and analyse how they impact the push towards
design consistency.
PreScriPtive ruleS
Prescriptive rules and guidelines specify in detail how a product or system should
be designed. This may include detailed design guidance of elements including, font
sizes, icons characteristics and specific functions applications must deliver. In the
maritime domain, there are both mandatory prescriptive rules and non-mandatory
prescriptive guidelines for design. A limitation of prescriptive rules is that they are
typically established from prior experiences and thus may have inherent biases in their
scope and content. Prescriptive rules related to engineering and t echnology-related
fields are also challenging due to the rapid evolution of contemporary technological
advancements. By the time the need for prescriptive rules are identified, developed
and released, the applications the rules were originally intended for may have less
relevancy or suitability. Currently, there does not exist prescriptive regulation in the
maritime sector that defines user interfaces at a level that may lead to digital design
consistency. The current rules manage some aspects of central applications, such as
ECDIS; however, none offer detailed specifications of user interface design.
goal-baSeD ruleS
Goal-based rules and guidelines define what a system should achieve, instead of how
it should be designed. These guidelines are useful in establishing high-level goals
( e.g. SOLAS chapter V/ 15 [International Maritime Organization, 2009]); however,
it is difficult to achieve consistent design using g oal-based rules, since a goal can
be achieved in many different ways, through many different solutions. Although it
is possible to mandate that a system should be designed consistently, it is difficult to
realize this in multivendor ecosystems, where many systems are developed independently by independent actors. As a result, a goal-based rule approach for realizing
consistent design may work within a single company or group of collaborating companies, but it is likely to fail when systems are designed and integrated by several
competing companies.
manufacturer controlleD conSiStency
Typically, larger vendors who control the design of an entire ship’s bridge deliver the
most consistently designed systems in the maritime sector. These companies may
achieve consistency across a single ship’s bridge or several ship bridges by controlling