My colleague Mauricio and I were confronted with a very practical problem yesterday that left us thinking quite a bit about user-centered design.
We are in Barcelona working at a client site and on the way back to our company apartment, we got a bit distracted talking about software and, as we walked down the stairs at the Plaça de Catalunya station, we realised that we were on the wrong platform. We had gone down to the railway station instead of the metro. We walked upstairs and as we tried to exit through, the ticket validation machines didn’t allow us to get out, it displayed “ticket not validated at entry”. Now, we were getting confused since we had purchased our tickets that morning, we had been able to get in. After a couple of tries, we walked towards the station master and quickly explained to him our situation. He looked at us and immediately took two “exit tickets” out of his pocket and told us “yes, that’s normal, you cannot exit in the same station you entered”.
Exit Ticket
Now, someone must have created that rule, right? Mauricio and I could immediately think of many user stories that would see a client exiting from the same station that they entered and we couldn’t understand under which circumstances you wouldn’t want someone to be able to exit (remember we were using a valid ticket that had been accepted to get in and we had a valid ticket when trying to exit through machines). The most amazing thing is that a decision was made to create an exit ticket, print it, modify the systems to accept it, instead of fixing the system. Why would one put such a restrictive rule onto a user that holds a valid ticket?
Our next step is now to try this exit ticket at other stations. Could this be a master exit ticket that allows us to exit from any station? That would be even more interesting 🙂 If you have any ideas about this system and why it’s this way, I would be very interested in your comment.