Satisficing

Satisficing is a process in which a designer settles for a satisfactory solution, rather than pursue an optimal solution. The best design decision is not always the optimal design decision. Sometimes, the success of a design is better served by a design decision that roughly satisfy (i.e. satisfice) rather than optimally satisfy, design requirements. There are three kinds of problems for which satisficing should be considered; very complex problems, time limited problems and problems for which anything beyond a satisfactory solution leads to diminishing results.

Complex design problems are characterised by a large number of interacting variables and a large number of unknowns, which makes an optimal solution unlikely. Therefore, the satisficer will seek only to improve upon the current design, rather than to achieve an optimal design.

Time limited problems are characterised by time frames that do not permit adequate analysis or development of an optimal solution.

There are cases in which a satisfactory solution is better than an optimal solution. Determining when satisfactory is best requires accurate knowledge of the design requirements, and accurate knowledge and perceptions of the users.  

Satisficing was used in Fox Feud because the project was a time-limited problem. Instead of creating the optimal solution, which would have been to design the profiles of all eighteen characters presented within the project, I created a satisfactory project where only one of the characters had a profile that was completed entirely. As a result, Fox Feud seemed more like a prototype, where users could get a good idea of what the final version would be like to use, rather than a finished piece of work. The guidelines students were given for this project, was to create an interactive piece, with at least four working pages. One profile in Fox Feud contained four pages so I was able to satisfice and still meet the design requirements. The main reason behind this decision to satisfice was because of time restraints. If I had attempted to make all eighteen profiles, I would have missed the deadline; therefore the best design decision was not the optimal design decision.

Another way in which I satisficed was with the animation loops for each of the characters on the home page. I animated each character frame by frame, and to get smoother results, should have had a lot of frames per movement. However, because there were so many characters and little time to study the movement of foxes, I usually only drew three frames for each piece of action. This produced satisfactory results, however, the optimum solution would have been to animate using more than three frames. If I had chosen the optimum solution I would have either missed the project deadline, or had half of my foxes animated, and the other half presented as still images on the home page. This would have ruined the consistency of my project, so I decided to satisfice. In this case, satisficing was used because of complexity and time constraints.