The personalization of the user interface: The line between the naturally conversational and the inaccurate

  • Article

From a grammar perspective, a personal pronoun in the objective case, such as you or me, or a pronoun in the possessive case, such as my, mine, or your, denotes ownership and responsibility. In this blog entry, I analyze the use of these pronouns in Microsoft Dynamics AX.

To start, I offer examples in different contexts for consideration.

Context 1: Documents, registrations, activities, and people

Does a user really own, documents, registrations, or people?

It seems that all data is owned by an organization, such as a company or a government organization. The individual user of an application, such as the Microsoft Dynamics AX application, is assigned duties that transfer responsibility and control of this data that is owned by an organization. This user is held responsible for the outcome of that control.

Here are a few specific examples of user interface content for consideration:

  • My open purchase orders

If I add a purchase order to Microsoft Dynamics AX, it is really my purchase order?

It seems more accurate to state that a purchase order is added to the system, recorded in a database, and assigned a status of open by an administration process that closes the purchase order when purchase events and purchase quantities are matched with payment request (vendor invoice) events and quantities.

  • My expiring project quotations

If my job requires me to maintain and monitor project quotations, are the project quotations or their statuses really mine, or are they are my responsibility?

It seems more accurate to state that the responsibility of maintaining a project quotation and monitoring its status are assigned to me.

  • My activities past due

If my job requires me to perform tasks and those tasks comprise a task or sets of tasks that can be performed by me, my manager, or any person who shares the same access control permissions as I do, are the activities really mine?

It seems more accurate to state that there are tasks that I have been assigned that are not complete.

  • My active leads

If my job requires me to identify leads, are these people and organizations really mine?

It seems more accurate to state that I have been assigned the responsibility for documenting the participants and consequences of a potential sales event and that I am responsible for transitioning the documents to the next stage in the sales qualification process.

  • My employees

–and–

  • Purchase requisitions for my direct reports

If my job requires me to manage people, do the people I manage belong to me, or does any data about them belong to me?

It seems more accurate to state that employees report to me.

  • Enter your name

If I am a user of an application, and I see a field labeled Name and a description of that field that reads Enter your name, what name is it that I enter? Is it my name? Or is it the name of the person or organization that I am authorized to perform tasks on behalf of?

It seems more accurate to state Enter the name of the person or organization.

Context 2: Data ownership and control

Does a user really own the data about himself that he adds to a system that is owned by an organization, or does the user simply have control of it?

For example:

  • My information (in context of selecting options for workflow notifications, for example)

If I personalize the product for my use, is the personalization really mine?

It seems more accurate to state that I activated a workflow rule or set of rules based on my preferences. The workflow process, features, policies, and rules are owned by the organization that owns the application.

  • My information (in the context of adding data about an employee to the system, for example)

While this context covers many aspects, including legal ones, it seems as though for at least one aspect, some data that is unique to an employee is owned by the organization, for example, my employee identification number. With respect to a government-issued identification number, it seems that while my government-issued identification number is unique to me, the number is owned by the government organization that issued it.

It seems that it might be more accurate to state that the rights to use and access this data are controlled by me.

Beyond a personalized content style

When an employee works in an organization, all data in an application, such as the Microsoft Dynamics AX application, is most often owned by the organization. The employee is granted responsibility and control over data that is owned by the organization.

Using personal pronouns in the objective case, such as you or me, or pronouns in the possessive case, such as my, mine, or your, in content such as the user interface introduces inaccuracies, particularly with respect to questions of ownership, responsibility, and control. In addition, using personal pronouns in the possessive case seems to omit consideration of scenarios in which a user may perform tasks for others, for example, in the case of administrative professionals who support teams of managers or people managers who may perform tasks on behalf of the people who report to them.

It seems that a practice that encourages accuracy and the development of neutral content in an application that does not assume user ownership is more scalable, configurable, and applicable in all work contexts.

Additional considerations for writing content should include writing about the application, the processes that the application supports, and the activities that are performed by users of the application. For example, content for the user interface should consider:

  • The scope of a user’s responsibility.
  • The point at which a user is responsible for data and artifacts and to whom control of the integrity of the data in the system is transferred.
  • The point at which a user transfers the responsibility and control for the integrity of the data in the system to another user.

If a personalized content style is required

If we do not develop neutral content in an application, and we include pronouns in the possessive case, such as my or your, it makes it challenging to write intelligible and clear content when we need to document an activity that references fields, descriptive content, or other artifacts that contain such pronouns. Such pronouns introduce an awkwardness that we must write around. Otherwise, we end up with sentences like: You can use the My approvals page to approved submitted expense reports.

To write around the use of pronouns in the possessive case to ensure accurate user interface text, we would have to use verbs that expressed past events (verbs generally ending in –ed) , as opposed to verbs in the present tense, and the text would need to include the prepositional phrase by me or to me. For example: Approved by me or Assigned to me.

However, this construction, while grammatically correct, offers its own set of writing challenges. For example, the following sentence reads as ambiguously as the My <x> constructions, and it is not clear: Select the Approved by me menu item.

If we need to personalize items in the user interface, it seems we might consider a wording pattern, such as: <Verb, past tense> <by or to> <registered user name>. For example:

  • Assigned to Maddalena
  • Downloaded by Phaedrus
  • Select the Approved by Dante menu item

However, such an approach to personalization, while grammatically correct and easier to write about, does encourage the use of verbs in the past tense, which is not in general as easy to read as present tense.

Maintaining a naturally conversational voice without personalizing content

To write neutral content that enables contributors to maintain a naturally conversational voice without using personal pronouns in the objective case or pronouns in the possessive case, we might consider a set of objective and measurable content guidelines that guides contributors and enables consistency. Those guidelines might include considerations such as:

  • The use of neutral and consistent terms and verbs that are verifiable in the domain.
  • The diversity of roles in the domain, industries, and locales.
  • The activity that a user is performing, the object of work, the subject, and the tools.
  • A naturally conversationally tone.
  • Alternatives to the use of personal pronouns in the objective case or pronouns in the possessive case.

A few content guidelines to support these considerations might offer wording patterns, term choices, and guidance on grammar and voice. A few examples include:

  • Specific wording patterns that incorporate contexts of responsibility and control. For example:
    • <Verb, imperative mood> a <name of the document type>
      • Maintain a project quotation
    • <Verb, imperative mood> a <name of the event>
      • Document a sales lead
    • <Verb, imperative mood> a <noun> <prepositional phrase>
      • Transition a sales event to the next stage in the sales qualification process

[Note: Imperative mood expresses requests or commands, is always in the present tense, and implies the subject you.]

  • Domain-specific terms and verbs that incorporate context of responsibility and control with respect to access control permissions. For example:

    • Add
      • Add a registration to a customer directory
    • Assign
      • Assign a user role to the person
    • Confirm
      • Confirm the vendor invoice
    • Modify
      • Modify the sales agreement
    • Settle
      • Settle an obligation or an account balance

  • Considerations for content that does not make assumptions about the actions a user can take given that not all users are granted the same access control permissions. For example:

    • Noun-based phrases that describe the concept
      • The factor applied when converting from the quotation currency unit to the base currency unit

  • Considerations for writing content with respect to the diversity of roles in the domain, industries, and the locales that the Microsoft Dynamics AX application supports. For example:

    • The term organization applies industry-wide; company applies most specifically to the commercial industry.

  • Specific wording patterns that incorporate the components of a grammatical structure, accuracy, clarity, simplicity, and a naturally conversational voice and tone for audiences. For example, the sentence structure that applies the pattern <subject> <verb> <object>.

    • A journal is a register of original accounting entries.

For more information

For information about content on the user interface, see my earlier blog entry, Content is the user interface.

For information about writing in a naturally conversational voice, see my earlier blog entry, The state of equilibrium: Balancing the voice of the application and the voice of the customer.