Although case studies are typically used to demonstrate the value of the approach, they have often not had the desired effect. Rather than being understood as an example of a new paradigm, they are seen as exceptions or experiments. Clearly we have not presented UCD in a way that meets their needs. We used affinity grouping techniques to identify obstacles to acceptance and organize them into groups. For each of these areas, we then looked at how we contribute to creating barriers to acceptance and what we can do to overcome them.
Managers are concerned about managing the workload and meeting their deadlines.
UCD practitioners often cannot reliably estimate time for an iterative process and lack the management skills to contribute to high-level planning. Possible solutions to these issues include Learning to communicate with business and software development management so we can provide reliable time and cost estimates Finding out who the keys to the planning process are and work with them to integrate UCD into the schedule, so analysis, design and testing activities can provide meaningful input. Set clear usability metrics so success can be measured Collaborate with the people and departments who can help us document success stories and make the case for the effectiveness of UCD Many of the issues raised surrounded how user-centered design integrates with the rest of the software development team. The development culture is seen as hostile to UCD, with fear of change, turf protection and a lack of share values and objectives all contributing to the problems. They see UCD practitioners as outsiders who do not understand their issues, sometimes justifiably.