My recent discussion paper, The Usability Gap, argues the industry is stuck because we confuse compliance (Information Management) with usability (Human-Centred Design). The solution lies in treating data as a Testable Product.

Now, let’s apply that diagnosis to a concrete example: The RIBA Smart Buildings Overlay. I believe this crucial framework is the epitomisation of a framework document that is begging to have testability built in.

To ensure the core concept isn’t lost in complexity, I’ve adapted my critique into the simplest possible terms—a short, humorous story originally shared on LinkedIn. It proves that the problem isn’t the size of the paper; it’s the mindset of the process.

---

The Janet & John Version: The Simplest Way to Plug the Gap

Part 1: Look! Look! Data is Not Useful!

Here is the Story of Project Man and Operations Man.

1. Project Man likes to build a Big Building.
2. Project Man follows a Big Book. The Big Book is called the RIBA Plan of Works.
3. The Big Book tells Project Man to follow the Old Way. The Old Way is called Waterfall.
4. Project Man writes a Big List of Data. This is called Information Management (IM).
5. Project Man thinks the Big List is Good. Project Man thinks the Big List is finished at Handover. Project Man goes home.

Operations Man is Sad.

1. Operations Man works in the Big Building.
2. Operations Man tries to use the Big List of Data.
3. The Data is Too Big. The Data is Too Complex. The Data is Not Useful.
4. Operations Man cannot do his Small Job, like fixing a chiller.
5. This sad story is called the Project-Operations Gap.

Part 2: But Wait! The Solution is a Testable Product

1. A Smart Person says: “Stop! This is the Wrong Way.”
2. The Smart Person says: “Start with the Small Job of Operations Man.” This is called Human-Centred Design (HCD).
3. The Smart Person says: “Operations Man only needs a Small List of Data. Maybe 15 Points.” This is called Minimum Data Handover Requirement (MDHR).
4. The Smart Person says: “We must Test the Small List with Operations Man in a Pilot. We must Test the Data to make sure it is Useful.”
5. The Smart Person says: “The Big Book must ask for a Testable Product, not a Big List of Guidance.”

Look! Look! The Big Book Review!

1. The Big Book (The Smart Buildings Overlay) is being reviewed.
2. If the review only makes the Guidance longer, the Gap will stay Big.
3. If the review asks for a Testable Product (the MDHR), the Gap will get Small.
4. The problem is HOW we think, not HOW big the paper is.

Do you see, John? Do you see, Janet?

---

Note: The methodology outlined here—moving from a strategic diagnosis to a simple, testable solution—is detailed in my full paper, The Usability Gap: Treating Data as a Testable Product along with summaries.

If you would like to pilot this MDHR Usability Test approach on your next project, or if you are a forward-thinking professional who would like to join the ongoing dialogue in the Start With Smart Group that helped inform this research, please connect with me on LinkedIn.