3.1.1. The problem with choice

The powers of disinformation, in other words, the ways currently used to attract consumers, often lead to them making the incorrect choice, product-wise. What the customer thinks they know prevents them from learning. When there are too many choices, there is no choice. The more important the choice, the more uncertain it is and the more it neutralizes the consumer.

Strictly from a usage point of view rather than one of marketing, the usage cycle, measured based on the standard lifespan of a “product”, starts with research and by choosing a method best suited to the use.

However, with usage reflecting, by definition, only part of the reality, we should not view consumers as a single entity against the competitive market. Both the consumers and the market are mutually influenced by a variety of socio-economic factors.

It is, however, necessary to focus on identifying and examining the practical relationships which exist between the different types of consumer-users, the various product models and types offered as well as the commercial and social environment that surrounds them (types of sale methods).

In a somewhat schematic way, the process of choice in terms of usage must go through three main phases. These correspond to the following questions which may go through the consumer-user’s head:

• – What am I using the product for and what are the essential requirements?
• – What is the specific type of material among those offered on the market that is best suited to my use?
• – Finally, which of the product models currently offered on the market can best satisfy my own usage requirements (choice criteria vary with each consumer)?

It is also worth noting that the pathway above does not single-handedly bring the consumer to the ultimate choice and a final purchase decision as a number of other key elements regarding the estimated value of the same product type are often at play.

The hierarchy between the choice criteria is dependent on the consumer-customer’s last resort. Customers are not all the same; their needs and desires are diverse and are frequently changing.

The image of “freedom” that the open market publicly portrays can actually hinder our ability to be aware of the purposes of consumer “activities”. So what information channels do we use to make the right choices?

Each of the questioning phases mentioned above require information which can help, support or lead to a choice that ensures habitual usability. In terms of the product’s ease of use alongside other choice criteria, we must look at the genuine usage performance of information channels on the products that are currently available.

Can we examine the efficiency and the practicality of vacuum cleaners by seeing them “tested” for a few minutes on 1 square meter of carpet for a few dust particles in the buzzing atmosphere of a department store or a living room?

The issue of choice stems from the information on products. Most of the time, the consumer comes up with a demand which more or less equates to: “I want to buy a vacuum cleaner, tell me which is the best?” and inevitably Satisfactory the process of choice and the information it uses will work hand in hand, along with marketing concerns.

Satisfactory information on products inevitably goes through a complicated and difficult process.

It is summarized schematically as follows:

• – In terms of dust removal, for example, what are the requirements in terms of my usage?
• – What are the various existing dust removal methods? What are their main advantages and disadvantages? And among these, which type of product (or service) will guide me towards my choice?
• – What are the different items of this type available on the market? What are their specific advantages and disadvantages?
• – Among them, which models are best suited to my usage?
• – Finally, among these models, if there are several, which item will I finally choose, given the relative importance that I give to such practical, financial, aesthetic or symbolic aspects?

Each of these phases in the choice process requires a level of suitable information. Each of these levels must have distinguishing elements to help make a decision. Choice criteria and information elements go hand in hand, from the most general to the most specific.

3.1.2. The process of choice

Depending on the disposition of the consumer, the latter can display:

• – healthy curiosity (learning about something);
• – fear (of not being on trend);
• – reluctance to consider another choice;
• – inertia and passive resistance to innovation;
• – refusal, by bias or fear of risk.

The consumer favors information which comforts and confirms their predispositions and beliefs. This reasoning, by overconfidence, can have serious consequences on the choice of products or devices made, for example, when based on the consumer’s disposition. This gives less importance to the other arguments. This means only considering information that confirms your own beliefs, listening only to sources likely to support them. It is staying true to your beliefs, even if your arguments are wrong. It is giving the most importance to the first piece of information received, which originates from your own beliefs. It is asking a question without waiting for the answer, only taking into account your personal predispositions!

Choice is often unwise. The consumer does not take the time to determine their true requirements for use. It is a type of intellectual laziness. We stick to our habits, for example, purchasing and re-purchasing the same brand. We no longer reason, and we robotically buy things.

Although choice involves both reason and emotion, it is mainly based on emotion. Too many choices hinder choice. Too much detailed information negatively affects decision-making due to the difficulty in prioritizing the factors.

The consumer must persuade themself that their purchases are suitable. After initial consideration, emotions are at play. This helps the consumer to decide.

Choosing a product on the market means solving a problem that must first be formulated according to its use. Then, from this correct formulation comes the types of information elements that can answer the questions of the consumer-user. Unfortunately, such a process seems too complicated to customers, who want a process that involves the least amount of effort. The first question concerns the service functions and, in particular, the essential services.

To reuse the above example, we do not often pick a toilet for its seat or its flushing mechanism. We may need to consider the potential consequences of the lid or the flushing mechanism we choose, but this may be of importance further down the line, especially for those who benefit the most from comfortable facilities.

It is the user who handles and operates the product, maintaining and changing it according to their requirements. Even if the lid and the flushing mechanism are far from being the only components of the product, it is still necessary that materially these subcomponents to be installed are compatible with the existing elements a priori (the bowl and tank, for example). This is a brief example of a problem of choice to be resolved. It is equally based on intellectual function and appropriate information, which can be taken advantage of.

We must refer to a “pedagogy of choice”. Without this pedagogy, the actions of information in all directions could be nothing but a waste of resources.

Schematically, the first question is therefore: “what are the requirements to be met that relate to my own usage?”

The second step involves looking at the various types of existing means, their main advantages and disadvantages in the same way as those previously identified (i.e. apart from strictly technical or commercial aspects): “which of the existing types should I orientate my choice towards?” It is worth noting that orienting one’s choice does not mean choosing definitively.

The third step becomes much more concrete as it finally brings tangible products and items into play. If they are not observable, they are represented by an image. The consumer therefore focuses their interest on the different models available or the different types of prospective products.

The advantages and disadvantages at stake become much more specific.

The question then is: “which models, among those offered, best meet all the requirements of my own use?” Note that the answer to this question could be: 40 models, 4 models, 1 model or 0.

The last step, where we make a definitive choice, therefore depends on the relative importance which is attached to such functional or extra-functional aspects (aesthetic or symbolic), to a particular aspect of user cost related to the likely usual longevity and the expected “service quantities” over time, to any aspect of after-sales service or the possibility of maintenance in the long term.

The pieces of information required at each step are becoming increasingly specific as the notion of “product” becomes more differentiated until it becomes an item to buy.

On the contrary, a definitive choice should not necessarily be confused with an immediate decision to buy. The consumer has the freedom to reconsider the elements at play during the different steps insofar as the latter or the penultimate step cannot lead to a possible or satisfactory choice.

The consumer may also delay their choice by hoping for a more satisfactory product offer (later, or at a competitor’s).

However, a choice must be made based on research, or even work. It should not be something that is imposed upon us.

3.1.3. The frustration of choice

Given the plethora of almost-useless information available when making a choice, shown by various powers (see Volume 1), the consumer often finds themselves frustrated. Without proof or a demonstration of the product, the consumer must try to believe the information. There will be discussions and negotiations, not on the product but on the information!

Making a choice really does require a certain amount of courage: electric, diesel, petrol or hybrid? Lawnmower or lawn tractor?

In some cases, the activity of choosing requires more effort than the benefits of using the product. The choices are entangled in a maze of rather confusing possibilities and these possibilities have numerous cloudy paths. Doubt, hesitation and indecisiveness become the only possible resolutions.

Consumers no longer want to waste time facing the infinite choices available. A brand renews their confidence!

Making a purchase is like voting. Not buying means you oppose such a product on the market. Choosing is the anxiety of being wrong or having too much confidence! The risk is either thinking too much, or badly, or not enough.

Is it possible to hope to choose the perfect product, the universal panacea, the one and only one that fully meets all the requirements, being the best for everyone?

The right choice of such a product only represents a short period of the relationship between the chosen product and its users. Therefore, each individual subconsciously knows that after choosing a product they are free to enjoy the product’s “happiness”, which is defined as “what is valued by the community” by the ideals of the time. With better choices, there would be less discontent, dissatisfaction and feedback, which lead to less waste and mismanagement. The decision to select one product from hundreds of others is a complex affair. The choice is often made, initially, on the supposed quality/price ratio of the products, on the simplistic image it portrays, without looking further at the “quality” (what quality?) or at the “price” (purchase price and not the “cost of use?”).

The consumer must take in a considerable amount of information, however useless or misleading. Unfortunately, this issue is not helped by computers and the Internet. When searching for a product, the buyer often does not know where to look, so any relevant information they come across appears to them as trustworthy. The consumer prefers to rely on their more or less immediate emotions, to leave it to chance, seek advice or align themselves with the choice of others. It is difficult to predict how much the product will satisfy its purpose. It takes some time for reflection depending on the type of products, the circumstances of purchase, the time available, the price, etc.

Without any information, the consumer must rely on their own intuition. There are different types of purchasing decisions:

• – authoritative decisions: one single person decides on the purchase;
• – majority decisions: the majority are in agreement, for example, when buying a boat;
• – minority decisions: a few family members make the decision, for a dishwasher, for example;
• – unanimous decisions: all the family, for example, when buying a house.

And here are some more or less risky methods when it comes to decision-making:

• – studying more seriously, researching better;
• – putting everyone’s ideas together;
• – trusting your first impressions;
• – taking advice from friends;
• – being guided in your thinking process;
• – asking another person to decide for you;
• – debating and negotiating;
• – looking for a consensus, making compromises;
• – relying on chance, tossing a coin;
• – not deciding straight away, and instead waiting to make a decision as to whether to buy the product or not.

Note that a group of people (often not necessarily competent) is often asked to decide instead of those that are more informed or responsible.

As decision-making requires a significant number of factors, information systems must be used (see SIP information system of the ICC in the Appendix). These systems must use usage analysis results for product selection.

Choosing is a poorly thought out activity due to products’ lack of relevant information regarding usage and the environment, whatever one may say and think about it.

The whole market is a huge system of bad decision-making risks, from the design to the decommissioning of products. The consumer has neither the intellectual means nor the time to properly think things through. Making a final decision is a matter of human responsibility and it is important that it remains so, whether regarding the choice of a product or, more dangerously, for military decisions.

3.2.1. The problem with usage

Qualities of usage are indispensable. The interactions between users, products and the surrounding environment are not very often considered. This lacks an intellectual movement to promote the field of use. This is also the case for industrial design. Neglecting basic use criteria does not come without consequences. For many consumers, as well as engineers, technicians, marketing managers, beauticians or vendors, the use poses a priori no “problems”: it is only a matter of common sense! It even happens that “providential” common sense is mistaken. It is enough to be confronted with control devices or visual control systems for a simple electric stove, a Hi-fi system, a car dashboard, a bath mixer, a subway tickets distributor or a website!

How many false maneuvers, disagreements or accidents (even aircraft problems) caused by negligence could be avoided?

For example, accidental slips in a bathtub, where more showers are taken than baths, cause injury. A significant proportion of accidental deaths are caused by domestic accidents, among both children and adults¹.

Contrary to immediate economic profitability activities, those with high accidental risks or military combat, domestic, public or semi-public activities are not often the subject of thorough usage studies.

With the change in trends and the rapidness of production methods, new product types and models (such as connected devices, robots and, before long, driverless cars) suddenly appear without reliable usage studies or information for consumers to make a choice. Unfortunately, their commercial attraction rests more on the “novelty notion” than on the better usage qualities in comparison to the products they supersede.

Taking into account the differences which separate individuals, including both cultural and physical aspects, it seems impossible that one product can satisfy everyone. Admittedly, some products are introduced into the market with the intention of attracting the largest number of targets possible, but they can only be successful in a monopoly situation or if they work to constantly refresh their audience by using clever marketing and publicity strategies.

3.2.2. The field of use

3.2.2.1. The field of use: products/users/environment relationship

3.3.1. Usage qualities

Usage qualities have an objective existence which does not depend on simple personal judgments like perceived qualities. The complexity of products often leads to frustration with use, even stress. This is not only the case for technological and IT equipment, but also for tin cans which are difficult to open, corks which are difficult, even impossible to unscrew, remote controls which are too complex, and hard to read notices.

If the need for simplicity is valued when making a purchase, it is even more so when it comes to using the product: the user no longer wants an unreadable or incomprehensible instruction manual. They do want devices that work immediately, without resorting to any help or, worse, to a “hotline”. Many products have been created without any thought into the daily reality of users and the usage quality for them! Users do not want to waste their time on tasks which bring them no satisfaction, which force them to rack their brains and, in addition, reveal to them their limited knowledge and skills!

The majority of daily products do not require hours, or even weeks, of learning and practice. Who can dedicate time to learn about using a product? These are design flaws, often unjustly blamed on users suspected of “not knowing” or “not understanding anything”. These errors are due to a lack of consideration regarding the very large variety of users who differ according to: age, gender, mental state, disabilities, physical abilities³, biomechanical abilities, gestural or operative fluency (right-handed/left-handed/ambidextrous), ways of life, cultural habits, religious dress, character, behavior, specific habits and circumstances. They can also differ according to a user who is: distracted, not meticulous, careless, manic, with playful or sensual inclinations, in a hurry or has free time, in a daily routine at home, in an occasional situation with a third party, depending on the type of enjoyment of the premises (property, long- or short-term rental, semi-private use), sensitivity to sources of embarrassment or nuisances (noise, smells, drafts, reflections, lack of light), aesthetic sensitivity (presence of houseplants, domestic animals), etc.

The use of a product is not unrelated to other complementary equipment or products, environmental conditions or constraints, or even the type of users or methods of use. Similarly, the user could be a regular or occasional user, or simply a beneficiary of the service provided. The place of use can extend to unique places, influencing the storage, installation, transport and security.

Use marks the end of the product’s journey. Progress must always be centered on the user and the environment. An innovation must always be an improvement of the quality of the product’s use or services, a source of progress which is not particularly technical.

3.3.2. Environmental qualities

The weather is milder now than it was hundreds of thousands of years ago^6,7. Many scientists only focus on the last 150 years! Therefore, let us keep a cool head on global warming. Ignore the brainwashing, the false proof, the exaggerations, the pseudo-scientific demonstrations, the extremism, the prejudices, the uncertain opinions and the catastrophism. It is easy to dramatize the rise of the oceans that strikes the imagination.

Do people not want to guarantee the business of the fight against global warming? An onslaught against nature often leads not only to the removal of these nuisances but also to the birth of an anti-pollution industry: GDP growth will also signify a deterioration of the environment rather than an improvement. For example, climate change, which stirs up the media and excites the international political scene, is subject to manipulation and misinformation on the part of some people.

The “right wing” media maintain their alarmist beliefs, excluding the arguments of more moderate camps. The information is partial, biased, even rigged. It is a concoction of unique and acclaimed thoughts and, more seriously, of several scientific errors. It is true that global warming will become a lucrative business. Industrial and commercial activity in developed or developing countries remains polluted, more or less. However, whether or not we believe in climate change, we must take advantage of it and pave the way for social and economic transformation, in order to lead us to a better, more just and equitable world.

We must, of course, change our behavior towards nature. Air pollution by dust and carbon particles, or by the emanation of toxic gases, must not be confused with the release of carbon dioxide. This is an inert gas which does not pose risks to the health of humans. If greenhouse gases have a significant impact on global warming, carbon dioxide is harmless on the respiratory system of living beings.

3.4.1. The analysis of usage/the criteria of evaluation

It is not a question of evaluating the products through points of view or from opinions, but to first move towards defining the factors of use evaluation criteria.

The functional analysis of use applies to the existing one, and more particularly to the favorable or undesirable consequences of the use of the different products in a multiplicity of real cases.

As the first link in the process of evaluation or product design, analysis is, strictly speaking, not a method we apply, such as a recipe. Its domain is that of use and use only; that is, it excludes the technical and instrumental functionality of the studied systems, the commercial potentialities of the goods and the desired image of the product.

In very simple terms, it is already about examining and dissecting the existing, the observable reality, the favorable or unfavorable concrete consequences of the relationships and interactions between: commercial products of the type of targeted products, users of different categories and surrounding environments. This first phase of general analysis is associated with a search for factual information on use: the general analysis, for a more or less specific type of product, relates to:

• – functional services: essential services, complementary services, any additional services;
• – operational functions of use, installation and maintenance: diversity factors of use cases that come from users (beneficiaries, user-operators, counter-recipients, consumers-payers), their activities, the environment use, environment and system states to use over time.

This preliminary phase of work continues with a more concrete identification in the field, in tune with the reality of the use of the products.

A study of use begins with an exhaustive inventory of the factors which come from the great diversity of the situations of use. The diversity of the cases of product use results from the multiple combinations which can exist between, on the one hand, the possibilities of functional services offered, and on the other hand, the factors coming from the various types of users, from the various types of conditions of product use and external environments, and also from the states of the system available for use.

Interview surveys are conducted on the qualitative aspects of real cases of use, on dissatisfaction and on the particular expectations of users, as well to actual pre-tests of use.

3.4.1.1. The reason for the study into dust collection methods: an example

The questionnaire survey is conducted for a triple purpose:

• – to gather clues about the importance of dust removal work and the commercial methods actually used – for the practical purposes of sampling the use cases and the products to be tested, then for weighing the analysis factors;
• – to recognize the sensitivity and the attitude of the users towards the problems of choice, use and qualitative evaluation of the products – in order to orient the informative messages to their current receptivity;
• – to identify the general or specific questions they wish for explicitly or not, to determine the information content to be extracted from the analysis and the comparative test.

It is not really a survey of satisfaction or motivation, but rather, a descriptive survey of cases of use and dissatisfaction. It is thus oriented towards the following aspects:

• – appliances and utensils owned and actually used, their advantages and disadvantages (as perceived or experienced);
• – previously owned devices and upcoming choices;
• – the individual problem of dust removal;
• – area, dust, time spent; who does the housework, what is dusted and with what, etc.;
• – reasons and sources of dissatisfaction, discomfort, inadequacy or even non-use.

It should be noted that it is equally significant to recognize what is not used and possibly why, than what is actually used.

3.4.2. How to evaluate usage qualities

In order to respond to the user-customer’s well-founded questions, it is necessary to have previously followed a similar path, and to have conscientiously sought out the required information. Because the latter do not disengage themselves and no one has really invested in it, the infused science is not appropriate and the source of information requires a methodical as well as considerable work (noticeable and important).

Faced with the diversity of usage cases (plurality of user-customers) and the multiplicity of product types and models of each type (richness of the offer), a double practice is required, that of the functional use analysis followed by the assessment of the actual qualities of use of the products.

The actual evaluation of the real qualities of use of the products does not require “negotiation” any more than the measurement of a physical quantity or a statistical value: know-how, intellectual integrity and professional responsibility should be, as in any field of a scientific nature, the guarantors of respect for valid recognized methodology, experimental conditions, instrumental tests, the relevance and reliability of criteria and scales of judgment.

Such work cannot suffer from the various pitfalls mentioned, while it is the responsibility of the study teams to consult, “exploit” or wisely involve, according to the resources of each individual, the various parties involved. In particular, it will be up to decision-makers concerned with product information to incorporate the “delicate” game of weightings, priorities and even “gray areas”, but under their own responsibility and in agreement (or not) with the point of view of other stakeholders.

Only then, at this level, short-term trade-offs between producers, distributors, repairers, standard-setters, informants and consumer organizations can become useful.

In fact, the requirements of use are difficult to evaluate all together or with shortcuts. The use is complex. While the merchant value is noble and cajoled, the use values, which are barbaric, only interest a few people. Affecting daily privacy, their evaluation is indiscreet, personal.

Indeed, the use of an object is not without relationships with that of other equipment or complementary objects, environmental conditions and constraints, or even types of users or modes of use. Similarly, the user can be either a habitual or occasional user, or they might simply benefit from the expected service. As previously noted in section 3.3.1, the place of use may extend to exceptional places that may affect storage, installation, transportation and security.

The evaluation of the qualities of use is based on criteria, evidence, facts, actions, realities, observations and demonstrations allowing incontestable certainties.

The extremely wide spectrum of these requirements of use covers in particular factors of:

• – psycho-physiological comfort;
• – psychological cost;
• – safety and hygiene;
• – nuisance, pollution, waste of natural resources;
• – economy of use (acquisition, installation, operation, maintenance);
• – affectivity (aesthetic and symbolic mediations);
• – etc.

The requirements of use are expressed in qualitative terms. They must be translated as quantitative performance requirements in order to be exploitable in the design and evaluation of products for choice.

It is a question of eventually being able to formulate the requirements and the expected performances of use. This consists of decomposing the range of requirements to a greater or lesser degree until there are less and less complex criteria for assessing the actual performance of the product candidates. The way is then opened towards the development of methods of usage tests and towards the formulation of the elements of information relevant to the use.

3.4.2.1. The methods of usage tests and test results

The main steps to follow are as follows:

• – sampling representative articles of the most specific types of products to be tested (with the most possible differences, where they are essential). At first, it is useless to test a half-dozen very similar products when just two or three are enough. On the contrary, the diversity of a priori different types can only be favorable when answering questions of the first levels and of the process of choice mentioned previously;
• – pre-testing and debugging of test methods for each of the elementary aspects identified in the analysis schema;
• – sampling of use cases;
• – detailed material conditions of tests, methods of measurement or qualitative assessment, record of observations to be kept;
• – comparative tests and systematic evaluation of the qualities of use of the product candidates for selection that are for sale, according to a rating scale (in general and in particular for the convenience of use);

A clear distinction must be made between:

• – possibilities and qualities of results for the services provided;
• – convenience and operational safety to use, install or maintain: analysis and evaluation of ergonomic expenditure and simplicity of use is generally the poor relation of technical tests and those of consumer magazines. However, in some cases, an “ergonomic cost”, which is too great an inconvenience for the user, who in general prefers to give up the purchased product rather than make the necessary manipulations for use. In other words, the customer leaves the invested capital unused, thus forsaking the paid and expected service of the product, rather than making the necessary expenses of manipulation. This explains the typical “bottom cabinet” products – appliances or kitchen utensils, for example (and with this, we only lose money and the dream of comfort…);

• – safety towards neighboring users and the surrounding environment;
• – factors of overall cost of use in the long term.

3.4.2.2. Use value

Depending on the distance of the subject from the “average market level” (represented by a median drawn from the statistic parameters of the distribution), it is possible to define the relative use value that such a purchaser can expect from the considered product. This is a true assessment of value.

Each “cost” or “service” branch is calculated on a computer from the final assessment criteria, taking into account the coefficients of importance of each criterion; for costs and services, we obtain an overall evaluation linked to a certain typology of uses.

Different coefficient programs are therefore necessary to take into account the different requirements of each user. Each program corresponds to a certain evaluation of the use value of each product, which is represented in the form of a cost/service diagram.

3.4.2.3. Usage value of 15 devices

Figure 3.6 corresponds to the dust removal study of floors along with their borders, corners, skirting boards, under furniture, on stairs, as well as radiators, vertical slots and shelves.

In Figure 3.6, the ergonomic cost is represented in relation to the service. Product no. 6 came in first. It needed the minimum amount of effort and handling for the best service.

Figure 3.8 corresponds to the dust removal study for large bare surfaces with different floor coatings and different types of dust and particles.

In Figure 3.8, product no. 35 came in first. It needed the minimum amount of effort and handling for the best service.

Other diagrams can be drawn from these basic evaluations.

3.4.4.1. Diversity analysis of usage cases

The diversity analysis of steam iron usage cases comes directly from multiple ironing activity combinations with the factors originating from complex real or highly probable “users/use environments/products”.

It is of the upmost importance to first understand, then to be able to refer at any time to the various elementary aspects which condition the use cases to be taken into account when designing the product.

3.4.4.2. Essential usage function

The technical function of such an object is to produce heat and to transfer it onto the fabric during ironing (by application and/or transitional pressing). The transfer of heat is then carried out either by conduction or combined steam projection.

On the contrary, in terms of use, ironing consists of making garments or upholstery fabrics de-wrinkled and primed.

A steam iron is a means only deemed suitable for an ironing board (a flat and horizontal surface) in the same way as a dry iron, a press or an ironing roller are for laundry pressing treatment.

Ironing, or rather, “uncreasing and finishing”, items of laundry is not a simple operational activity, but rather a relatively complex activity due to the multiplicity and sequence of operations to be performed. In other words, there is an art to it. In this respect, it can be emphasized that ironing is often experienced as a task or a duty, a constraint rather than a pleasant activity! Ironing is often performed within a family, by the same person, on a regular basis or at least several times a month or even several times a week.

What interests the user is obviously not the action of ironing, but rather the resulting effects, the result obtained compared to the expected result.

The quality of the ironing is characterized by the physical condition of the laundry and the absence of wrinkles (subject to sufficient know-how and the correct choice of temperatures).

Functional services are then conditioned by the types of laundry items, the characteristics of the fabrics to be ironed and the desired degree of finish. The implementation of certain ironing devices must not cause undesirable or irremediable effects to the garments (singeing, water staining, etc.). Thus, the absence of these negative aspects is added to the services expected by the user.

Finally, it should be noted that the iron is part of a system of indissociable elements necessary for the ironing activity (iron + support for ironing + accessories).

3.4.4.3. Factors linked to users

• – Gender and ironing experience: whether one is a housewife, single person, teenager, father, housekeeper, etc.;
• – ironing tasks: time spent, duration and number of items to be ironed (by an individual, family, third-party laundry services, regular or occasional ironer), ironing necessary to do when away from home (on holidays, while traveling, while staying at a friend’s house, etc.);
• – height and physical ability: anthropometric measurements, physical ease, bio-mechanical abilities to maneuver, lift, carry, the user’s dominant hand (right-handed, left-handed, ambidextrous), whether they are a teenager of small stature, physically disabled, elderly, mentally handicapped, visually impaired, etc.;
• – specific habits and circumstances: user who is busy or has lots of free time, whether or not ironing is a habitual or occasional affair, whether one is a nervous or confident ironer, ironing interspersed with other activities (such as listening to music, radio, television or conversation with other people), simultaneous monitoring, dress code according to the circumstances; snacking, drinking or smoking while ironing;
• – ironing requirements and the user’s individual ironing style: unconcerned or “manic” ironing, distracted, careless or meticulous ironing, whether or not the task is considered a “nightmare” or carried out with pleasure;
• – ironing positions: standing, sitting or semi-seated (resting on a high seat), or alternatively, both sitting and standing;
• – specific uses: moistening of the clothes before ironing, use of a press cloth or a spray while ironing;
• – sensitivity to the aesthetic qualities of products: perception of shapes, colors, textures, surface finishes, visuals, nature of the materials and state of cleanliness.

3.4.4.4. Factors linked to the elements of the system used

• – The type of ironing board: folding model, standard board with blanket and sheet, kitchen or dining room table, ironing board resting on the floor or on a table, table with a fine cotton, aluminum, metal or fleece cover, foam mattress screen “vapor barrier”, elastomeric mat, wobbly table, iron’s ground adhesion, negative effects of the iron (noise, vibration), stability and straightness of board cover, dimensional abilities for ironing and laying down material, presence of a retractable iron rest, a built-in electrical socket;
• – materials: sleeve board accessories independent of or included with the ironing board, refillable water funnels, bowl for press cloth, mineral remover, guide for the iron’s electrical cord, cleaner for the sole, descaling agent, etc.;
• – the mains connection proximity and accessibility of the socket, the use of an extension cord, presence of a switch and whether it is luminous or not, connection to a detection device or alarm in case of overheating and smoke, etc.

3.4.4.5. Factors linked to the use environment

• – Types of textiles: linen and delicate cloth, complicated shapes, flat linen or closed garments, large-sized clothing which could be heavy to handle when ironing, wet cloth or press cloth used to stiffen clothing;
• – place of ironing and laundry space/room: office, kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, hallway, living room, basement, attic, spacious or cramped areas, etc.;
• – conditions: ambient conditions with natural or artificial lighting, glare hazards, hygrothermal and aeration conditions, risk of electrostatic discharge, risk of leaving dust or staining, etc.;
• – related issues: risk of inconvenience by the smells or the impact of the iron’s noises or released steam, risk of falling or tilting which could damage the surface that the iron is placed on as well as the electric cord, whether or not the iron is laid on the ground due to surrounding activities, etc.;
• – storage and space available on the ground, in a room, in a shed, a toilet, in a closet, on a shelf, on a wall bracket on the ironing board, near a water tank, refilling and emptying the iron, cleaning the sole, aesthetic coherence with the surrounding environment, etc.

3.4.4.6. Factors linked to the devices (steam iron)

• – Types of steam iron, depending on the water used: demineralized water, tap water, a mixture according to the hardness of the water;
• – retractable, fixed or independent water tank;
• – vapor flow as a function of temperature, adjustable steam degree;
• – pressing option: steam jet control;
• – water spraying option: spot wetting control;
• – power supply, iron with electrical cord, iron with electrical cord with retractor and/or with storage;
• – rechargeable or not;
• – forgetting how hot the iron is, iron left or permanently unplugged with the minimum temperature selected, wear and tear of the electrical cord;
• – performance and instrumental characteristics: condition of the sole, risk of clogging (sticking together of fabrics, synthetic melting), scratching, degradation due to cleaning;
• – state of the device: new, repaired or old, apparatus with a missing or broken accessory, worn, deteriorated or has a damaged surface condition, cleanliness of the device;
• – there are limited ironing options for certain types of fabrics and clothing, malfunction of scaling of the vaporization system, deposition of limestone on the baseplate, lack of contact of the electrical cord, malfunction of the control devices, water leakage indicator lights working or out;
• – type of mains plugs;
• – blockage of the device;
• – device usage performance:
  • - convenience and safety for operation,
  • - convenience and safety for ironing a wide range of garments and clothes without any annoyances for the user,
  • - convenience and safety to leave on hold or put away until the next use,
  • - convenience and safety for cleaning and maintenance,
  • - no nuisances or accidental risks to the surrounding environment,
• – overall cost of use in the future (for the records);
• – longevity of the steam iron under actual conditions of use: technical durability of all components, availability of accessories to be replaced, maintainability in case of accidental deterioration, estimated value, cost of acquisition, long-term use and maintenance.

3.5.2.1. Information level 1: for uniquely descriptive information

1. 1) General analysis of the usage factors and requirements for a family of products

   This first step consists of:

   • – an inventory of usage cases, in terms of user/commercial product/use environment relationships:
   • – nature of floor coverings and furniture to be dusted,
   • – size and particularities of the house: stairs, cupboards, ground floor, etc.,
   • – type of dust and particles to remove: dog hair, bread crumbs, etc.,
   • – aptitudes of some users: children, elderly people, etc.,
   • – possible neighboring noise issues,
   • – a long-term budget: “purchase price and actual costs of use”.
   • – an inventory of the different types of competing products and collection of all the information concerning them (specific models, technical-commercial characteristics, standards, test specifications, comparative test results, etc.);
   • – a qualitative study on the user’s requirements, the reasons for their dissatisfaction and the specific characteristics of their usage case.

     NOTE.– A family of products is defined from a general-purpose function, for example: a domestic dust collection device, excluding technical functions.

1. 2) Creating a characteristic scale linked to usage for each specific type of product. This will include:
   • – filtering the information available so that we only take in the characteristics relevant to usage. First, a work grid comprises the “union” of all future specific grids as well as all desirable characteristics, including those that are partially available (not all products are homogeneously described). Such a grid allows us to establish an “identity card” for any item of the family of products concerned;
   • – choosing a category complete with an index (if necessary) to guarantee for all products comprehensibility and accuracy of the characteristics, the possible scalability to new headings and the homogeneity of the different grids of specific types of products that will result if necessary. In addition, it sets the vocabulary to be used in all of the following steps. To regulate the vocabulary, we must be able to fall back on a terminological reference (or thesaurus);
   • – determining measurements or identifications concerning useful characteristics which are missing (conditions and measurement methods). For example, the action range of a device from a power outlet is relevant to the use, while the length of just the power cord is, without doubt, insufficient information;
   • – using actual tests in order to outline any points of issue or to confirm certain “claims”. However, it is not a question of evaluating, even roughly, the general performances of the types of products.
2. 3) Creating an information dossier on the descriptive characteristics of different types of products, as well as on all instructions related to usage. This information level does not cover any assessment of the performance of the products. Although the temptation is strong, the general assessments on the types of products from use surveys and/or pseudo-tests are to be avoided (see Volume 1 for information on the pitfalls of surveys and panels). However, this first approach constitutes an essential phase for the research of deeper and more systematic information.

3.5.2.2. Information level 2: for information on functional ability and safety

1) Critical analysis of the standards of functional ability and safety, in light of the remaining information and issues at level 1, and participation in standardized testing in accredited laboratories.

2) Adoption and/or suggestion of changes to standardized tests, or in the process of being, according to their relevance for use, and development of proper tests where they are lacking, with the help of standardization bodies, if possible.

3) Essential quality control tests, effective limits and the safety of the functional services provided by the products.

4) Technical safety tests exceeding, where necessary, the strict framework of the standards in force.

5) Possible extension of the information dossier with certain evaluations on the type of products, where a large number of items of each type have actually been tested.

6) Addition of qualitative sections and specific observations to the grids of the types of products as well as to the tested products’ files.

3.5.2.3. Information level 3: for more thorough information on the usage of items

1. 1) Sampling of specific types of products which are as different as possible: electrical and mechanical devices, tool manuals, complementary accessories, etc. This sampling has no link with the commercial success of this or that product. It is made from the various data collected and analyzed at level 1. The sampling is concretely translated by the acquisition of 3 or 4 different models at least by type of product.
2. 2) Exploratory pre-tests and development of a functional analysis schema:
   • – from the diversity of the usage case, it is about concretely determining and structuring all the factors that make up the subject of a test or qualitative evaluation;
   • – pre-tests of actual use followed by exploratory pre-tests in a “laboratory” to set evaluation criteria and scales of judgment.
3. 3) Development of methods, installations and test conditions.
4. 4) Comparative tests and systematic evaluation of the sample and all other items, according to a schema of analysis and fixed criteria: cost and detailed observations.
5. 5) Translation of raw test results into appropriate information for decision-makers (consumers, distributors or designers).
6. 6) Editing the information as:
   • – informative sheets or files related to choice and the usage of different types of products;
   • – products files, “descriptive labels” for catalogs or informative (Internet) files relating to the items tested;
   • – comparative tables concerning the selection made by a distributor or a consumer organization.

3.5.2.4. Information level 4: for personalized information

• – The establishment of a computerized information bank which offers the possibility for each consumer to make their own selection of items available on the market from their own requirements of use;
• – the validity and credibility of such a tool to help consumers with their choice implies there is an imperative respect for certain drastic operating conditions.

3.5.5.1. Databases

It is regrettable that there is no product information database. Technical offices store a wealth of information on both intelligence and documents. Marketing companies feed on cookies, spam and other stolen fruits through the Internet. These are high value, invisible techniques that still escape the perception of the general public.

The relationships between products, users and the environment as well as useful product information can become the main asset of a new economy based on the quality of life and well-being. This is information with high added value because it requires human expertise. It must be managed at the State level, outside the trading world.

The amount of information available, usually commercial or technical, is both misleading and too bulky to quickly find relevant and useful information during the purchase.

It is enough to take as an example the invasion of e-mails and websites that are consulted less and less, because they cannot be analyzed or even read.

It is thus necessary to redefine a real economic intelligence that is not only linked to the technical, financial or market world.

The “new” information technologies therefore bring tremendous ease of transmission and tips. They also present risks because the information is not controlled.

This commercial information (or even, one could say, lies) can threaten the credibility and reputation of a company or product when information is disseminated over the Internet.

The information system must provide useful information, and only at the right time, without the need for lengthy and time-consuming research.

The cultural and scientific influence of a country requires the establishment of such a knowledge management system.

3.5.7.1. Information sheets on toys

The development of information sheets for all partners (manufacturer or distributor, standardization bodies) aims to publish labels and information sheets on the use of each toy (packaging, catalogs, files, the Internet, journals, etc.).

3.5.7.2. Principles and approaches adopted

It is a question of proposing to each person, according to their concerns and their own requirements, the maximum number of relevant elements of information (thought they must be relevant), to better choose and use the toys.

As a result, the information in question is neither commercial nor technical.

It only concerns the use of toys: as products to choose and as commercial products (to play, to implement, store, maintain or repair).

The initial information file contains six types of information elements:

• – the identification of the toy (commercial product, type of toy);
• – the recommended age and destination;
• – the functions and their playful, educational and stimulation purposes;
• – the recognized advantages and disadvantages, in use;
• – a useful description of the toy and a reminder of the legal indications;
• – various observations useful for production and distribution.

As a first step, two very distinct approaches have been adopted, in order to highlight their advantages, their difficulties and their respective pitfalls.

According to the first approach, based on the functional analysis of use, available or easily enterable information is “filtered” according to criteria of relevance to use (without any form of weighting).

Brief pre-tests of use are also practiced with some available children.

According to the second approach, the experience and pedagogical skills of independent groups of nursery school teachers are used.

On the one hand, by exchanging opinions and points of view, each “panel” will have to express itself and give a preliminary ruling on the presentation of each toy, according to each section of the initial information sheet (without having seen the previous results).

Each toy will actually be used in some classes, for about a week, for observation purposes, in order to confirm, invalidate or supplement the first indications given.

3.5.7.3. The initial information sheet

A grid is proposed as a model of the initial information sheet. Editorial specifications must be drawn up later to ensure consistency in the wording and presentation of the content elements.

The synthesis of the results of the two adopted approaches leads to a proposal for an initial information sheet for each of the chosen toys. Their presentation and the overall methodology that is followed illustrate the requirements for information on the use of toys: information elements, as brief as possible, must be translated into clear language that is understandable to all; they must be formulated in homogeneous terms from one form to another, to allow comparisons between toys; they must cover all the aspects of use concerned (without omission) with a degree of deepening comparable from one form to the other; and they must be, obviously, relevant and just, that is, they must conform to the sensitive and verifiable reality of use, free from bias, partiality and approximation subject to misinterpretation.

Each sheet must be dated and be able to be updated in case of modifications of the manufacturing or in the case where incomplete or unintentionally incorrect indications need to be fixed. In addition, it is the responsibility of the issuing bodies to produce these initial information sheets to ensure their credibility.

The sheets contain a series of relatively punctual data or assessments that each person must consider and weigh to their true value, according to their own requirements and their own constraints.

The same rather negative characteristic may have a very minor importance for some consumers, and relatively major importance for others.

The risk of excessive “magnification” of all or part of the favorable or unfavorable characteristics mentioned in the sheet remains an inevitable stumbling block of all forms of unilateral written information (without the possibility of dialogue to appease consumers).

What good is this type of information sheet, if the elements it contains were “covered” by the lack of relevance or fear of evidence (recognized a posteriori) or were “filters” put forward, only to highlight the positive and flattering characteristics!

Too accustomed to advertising information, with which “everything is always the best for the best of all worlds”, it is important that consumers of toys, like other products, always keep in mind that, in terms of usage, an ideal and perfect product that suits everyone in all circumstances does not exist.

It is above all, for everyone, best to avoid the worst choices by seeking the most possible benefits and with minimal inconvenience.

The methods of assessment adopted here cannot claim to ensure the completeness and level of depth to which systematic methods of analysis and comparative tests of use lead.

Furthermore, it seems to us quite risky or whimsical to want to assign global assessments (notes, stars or other) to each of the headings of the initial information sheet, when only given the few qualitative assessments they contain.

The obvious risk is to want to simplify at all costs the irreducible complexity of the issue of use. In any case, those responsible for drawing up these initial information sheets cannot guarantee such practices without carrying out evaluation work that is as long as it is expensive.

3.5.7.4. The indication of toy prices and strength

Accustomed to commercial catalogs and products at the point of sale or on the Internet, each consumer wishes to have the price of the toy as an element of information. However, this initial form cannot be considered as a complete means of commercial labeling. The freedom of prices and their periodic fluctuations exclude practically all forms of indication on this subject from the information sheet (indicative value, price range, price taken at date and place). If the price remains of paramount importance in terms of acquisition, it is worth remembering that the price considered in isolation, without relation to the probable longevity of the use and maintainability of the product, must not be confused with the actual cost of use.

It will be up to each user organization of these sheets to add and update an indication of the price at its convenience.

In addition, although the assessment of “strength” (resistance to shocks and wear, reliability of mechanisms) is unanimously desired (parents, teachers, buyers), it is recalled that significant information on the probable longevity of the toy according to various use cases, its safety in the event of partial deterioration and its ease of repair, will go far beyond the limited scope of these sheets.

3.5.7.5. Recommendations and feasibility: methodological point of view with a toy as an example

It seems difficult to go below such a threshold of work without offending the superficial buyers without purpose, the partially biased and even the “I’ll buy anything” types.

Above all, it is important to not stop at mere ad hoc opinions or points of view, whether they are experienced teachers or knowledgeable experts, if they speak out of a context of actual use of the toys studied (community play, play at home).

A synthesis of the information elements of complementary sources is then necessary to ensure the relevance, the homogeneity and the validity of the information.

For each toy, the proposed methodology is as follows:

• – unpacking and knowledge of the toy;
• – verification of the content according to the description or instructions for use;
• – preliminary tests and understanding of the instructions or rules of the game;
• – preparation of the initial information sheet;
• – identification and indexation of types of toys, useful descriptions, playful functions involved (preliminary);
• – brief functional analysis and outstanding issues;
• – preparation and delivery of the toy to the group of teachers to put in a situation;
• – communication of the strictly objective elements of the sheet;
• – discussion and exchange of points of view on the elements to be observed and appreciated (according to the grid of the initial sheet);
• – actual use by various groups of children and observations briefly recorded by the members of the group (telegraphic style on the initial sheet given);
• – recording of group discussions, oral indications, comments and observation results (recorded on a tape recorder);
• – development and drafting of initial information sheets;
• – summary of the collected information;
• – possible final checks on children in the event of contentious or contradictory aspects;
• – formulation of the information, ensuring the homogeneity of the language between the sheets;
• – formatting before final word processing;
• – sending initial sheets to the various partners;
• – preliminary submission of the sheets to the manufacturer or distributor for possible comments (with response time);
• – definitive word processing and indexed storage;
• – sending final sheets to the various partners;
• – control of the use of the delivered information elements;
• – control according to contractual specifications.