I just read Dan Russell’s “getting people to decide” post over on the “Creating Passionate Users” blog. (A pretty decent blog, btw, if you’re into web site/application development. I’ve added it to my [sparse] collection of RSS feeds I subscribe to.)

I was struck by the conclusion of their post, which reads:

Here’s the bottom line: Be specific in your help and support. Be very clear. And get your users to decide to do something with your product. Don’t let it just lie there and go out of their attention—get your users engaged!

I found myself thinking, “Well, okay, I guess that’s true enough. But what about the social side of things?” After all, the most compelling “support” forum I’ve seen in recent times is the lala.com feedback page. And it’s success comes not from Lala’s [non-existent] “clear and detailed tutorial”. The success comes from the fact that users interact with eachother in a highly dynamic way to self-discover the aspects of the product that are compelling to them.

Which, in some ways, argues for exactly the opposite of what Dan’s post says. A site shouldn’t try to dictate what users should find important. A site should provide as many rich and powerful tools as possible, and then get the hell out of the users’ way and see what they do. “Support” should only come into play when users point out roadblocks that are preventing them from accomplishing whatever it is they want to do.

I find myself comparing Legos (simple bits and pieces of plastic that don’t come with instructions) to the Mousetrap board game (highly specialized bits of plastic that make exactly one meaningful construct)…

• Lego Corp. (One product): US$105M profit in 2005
• Hasbro Corp. (84+ products): US$310M profit in 2005

Interesting.