Every millimetre counts

This XPENG video is a great example of the power of communicating key ergonomic dimensions and decisions during product development.

It’s not enough to design for good ergonomics — we must also clearly articulate these decisions to internal and external stakeholders.

In addition to our virtual assessments, package hardpoints, user testing, and regulatory standards compliance, this kind of communication is key to ensuring that every decision serves the user. That’s how we influence engineering, design, and commercial teams to make product choices that truly benefit the user.

After all, our job isn’t done unless we’ve maximised every millimetre for the user’s advantage. From the looks of it, the XPENG ergonomics team fights for every millimetre — and I admire and respect that.

My comment is purely about the excellent communication technique — I’m not expressing any opinion about the product itself, and I have no knowledge of it.

Ford Explorer & Capri: Driving Pleasure, UX Pain

Over the past few weeks, I had the opportunity to drive the all-electric Ford Explorer and Ford Capri.

Both are genuinely impressive EVs — well-engineered, responsive, with strong range and rapid charging. The Explorer, in particular, stands out for its balance and driving dynamics. A job well done from a chassis and drivetrain perspective.

But the Human-Machine Interface (HMI) is another matter entirely.

And it raises a question that’s becoming all too common:

Why do so many EVs fail so fundamentally on usability?

Is it the pressure to appear “futuristic”? Or the misguided idea that different equals better?

Here’s what stood out — and not in a good way:

The capacitive steering wheel switches replicate the known usability failures of the VW ID-series. They offer poor feedback, inconsistent operation, and are bound to be replaced. Why repeat known mistakes?

The USB ports are awkwardly placed — difficult to see or access, particularly while driving. Worse, placing anything in the central storage area risks accidentally triggering the hazard button. That’s not innovation — that’s bad design.

The mirror adjustment controls are vague and low in tactile feedback. A basic task has been made unnecessarily difficult.

These are not small issues. They shape how the driver interacts with the vehicle every day. And they undermine what is otherwise a very competent EV.

There’s still debate in some circles about whether Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) are “still relevant” in the age of EVs and digital interfaces.

Let’s be clear: HFE is more relevant than ever.

It ensures designers, engineers, and stakeholders stay aligned with real user needs. It prevents avoidable friction. And it transforms strong engineering into exceptional user experience.

Let’s stop solving the wrong problems.

Let’s build EVs that are not only great to drive — but easy to use.

New Audi Q6: A Design Decision That Raises Serious Concerns

As a long-time admirer of Audi, I deeply respect the company’s innovation and commitment to excellence. However, after testing the new Audi Q6 on 30 November 2024 in Germany, I encountered a feature that warrants serious reconsideration: the passenger display. To be candid, this is the most distracting feature I have ever experienced in any of the cars I have tested.

While the concept of a passenger display is intriguing, its execution in the Q6 presents significant challenges. The display’s large reflective surface is highly distracting for the driver, reflecting the surroundings and constantly catching attention. The human visual system, evolutionarily attuned to detect brightness changes in the periphery, is particularly sensitive to this effect. In practice, this means the display frequently diverts the driver’s eyes away from the road—posing a serious safety concern.

It’s surprising that this feature passed Audi’s internal safety evaluations and made it to production. Given its potential implications for driver safety, I wonder how regulatory bodies like NHTSA might assess it. This feature could potentially lead to a recall.

Interestingly, when I am critical of design decisions, people often suggest it’s due to cost-cutting. But in this case, Audi has clearly invested considerable resources to add something that negatively impacts both UX and safety.

With the best intentions, I propose the following suggestions to Audi:

-If the passenger display is an optional extra, consider immediately halting its availability until the issue is resolved.
-Explore the development of a hardware trim cover or other solutions to mitigate the reflection issue.

I want to emphasise that there are some truly innovative HMI features in the Q6, and the team has clearly worked hard to create a modern, cutting-edge system. However, for me, the passenger display issue overshadows everything else.

Audi has a well-earned reputation for safety and innovation, and I am confident they will address this issue thoughtfully. My hope is that this feedback can help ensure the Q6 meets the high standards that Audi drivers and enthusiasts expect.

A Unified Approach for EU Automakers: Standardising Vehicle Interfaces

The European automotive industry, historically the engine of Europe’s economy, now faces an urgent need to balance three central priorities: economic growth, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility. As competition from Asia and the US intensifies, the EU must act swiftly to preserve all three. Failing to find the right balance risks losing not just one, but all of these pillars, undermining the industry’s future in Europe.

1. This is Not the Time for Philosophy – It’s Time to Act

With factory closures and redundancies on the horizon if change doesn’t happen fast enough, waiting for legislation or guidelines is not an option. European OEMs must take the initiative and drive change now to stay competitive. Delaying action only increases vulnerability—this is the moment to commit, align, and make bold moves.

There are numerous areas where collaboration and standardisation can strengthen the industry, but I’d like to focus on my area of expertise: Human-Machine Interface (HMI).

2. Why Standardisation?

Cutting Costs and Improving Driver Familiarity Standardisation in HMI design offers immediate, tangible benefits:

• Economies of Scale: Shared HMI interfaces simplify production, cutting costs and freeing up resources for high-impact innovations.

• Driver Familiarity: Consistent layouts help drivers adapt quickly between vehicles, boosting safety and ease of use.

• A Foundation for Brand-Specific Innovation: With shared HMI standards, automakers can focus on creating unique brand experiences at higher levels without re-engineering the basics.

3. Software is Hard – The Role of a Common Operating System

Developing proprietary operating systems is costly and complex, often leading to fragmented systems that complicate updates and add unnecessary overhead. While some OEMs, like VW and Mercedes, have pursued bespoke platforms, a unified platform like Android Automotive OS offers a more efficient solution.

This shared, flexible base supports brand-specific customisation without reinventing core elements. By using a common platform, manufacturers can build unique HMI features at the top layer, allowing them to innovate quickly and focus on delivering seamless, user-focused experiences.

4. Standardising Key HMI Physical Controls for Safety and Familiarity

Standardising physical HMI controls across the cabin enhances usability and safety, ensuring drivers can operate essential features intuitively and with minimal distraction. Here are some essential standardisation wins (already present in many OEMs):

• Cruise Control / ADAS on the Left: Placing ADAS controls on the left side of the steering wheel .

• Media Controls on the Right: Positioning media and volume controls on the right side.

• Centrally Located Hazard Button (Y=0): A visible, centre-aligned hazard button ensures it’s easily accessible in emergencies, reducing response time and enhancing safety.

• Gear Selector: Embracing Automatic as the Norm: With automatic transmissions now the preference for many drivers, establishing automatic as the standard—with manual as an optional extra—aligns with market trends, simplifies production, and creates a streamlined vehicle layout.

• Physical Climate Controls: Stop playing Tesla’s or Chinese OEMs’ game, we want physical controls. Maintaining physical controls for essential climate functions, like temperature adjustment and fan speed, enhances usability, safety, and driver satisfaction. There’s a distinct satisfaction in operating a well-crafted physical control—the tactile feedback from a precision-engineered button or dial allows drivers to make adjustments quickly and confidently, without diverting attention to a touchscreen.

Note: Standardisation should focus on HMI layout and architecture rather than using identical components. Each OEM can maintain unique designs and brand identity while ensuring the same control positioning, layout, and intuitive functionality. This common architecture improves user familiarity and experience without restricting individual brand expression.

5. Driving the Future

Standardising HMI elements and adopting a shared platform provides European automakers with a practical, cost-effective foundation for innovation. Far from limiting creativity, a unified approach enables OEMs to build on a solid base, delivering distinctive brand experiences while ensuring safety and usability.

The recent Volvo-Daimler partnership to co-develop a software-defined platform for trucks is a prime example of how collaboration can drive industry-wide transformation. This joint effort illustrates the potential for EU automakers to work together, setting the stage for industry-leading progress and efficiency that all European manufacturers can benefit from.

This is the time to act decisively, take ownership, and drive change across the industry—before external forces or regulations leave us with fewer options and threaten the very foundations of Europe’s automotive strength.

The Importance of HMI Strategy: Decisions That Stick for Years

When it comes to HMI design in vehicles, the decisions made today will stay with the product for a long time—typically at least four years. Poor choices in HMI don’t just affect production costs or company reputation; they have a direct, long-lasting impact on the customer experience. This is why it’s critical to develop an evidence-based strategy built on the principles of human factors and ergonomics.

This is particularly true for automotive startups, where the success of their first vehicle can determine the future of the entire company. Getting the HMI right from the start isn’t just important—it’s vital to survival.

Take the Lucid Air, launched in 2021, as an example. While innovative, the vehicle's HMI had several notable flaws, seemingly ignoring human-centred design principles:

• Obstructed Instrument Cluster: Large portions of the instrument cluster are blocked by the steering wheel, and this issue worsens when the driver’s hands are on the wheel, further obstructing critical information.

• Steering Wheel Button Reach: The lower row of buttons on the steering wheel is positioned too far for easy thumb reach, making them uncomfortable to operate while driving.

• Low Climate Control Display: The climate control display is positioned too low in the cabin, requiring long glances away from the road to interact with the controls—something that significantly detracts from safety and usability.

Where was the research? Where were the human modelling simulations? Who represented the customer when these decisions were made?

Having worked with world-class designers, I know their natural ability to craft solutions that truly suit the user. More importantly, great designers listen to the evidence. Unfortunately, in some cases, there are designers who don’t even drive but still think they have all the answers.

It seems that Lucid recognised these issues and is working to rectify them in their upcoming Lucid Gravity, set to launch in late 2024 (though I still have some concerns around the steering wheel, instrument cluster, and air vent efficiency). It’s a good example of learning and iterating, but also a reminder of how critical it is to make the right evidence-driven HMI decisions early on, particularly for startups.

When you’re dealing with challenges in powertrain, electrical architecture, or vehicle dynamics, customer-facing attributes often take a back seat. Sometimes it’s easier to cherry-pick testimonials or rely on paid influencers that align with your decisions—I get it. But only when we are truly committed to evidence-based decisions and the principles of human factors and ergonomics can we create an HMI that not only pleases the customer but also helps the company thrive in the long term.