I hope that choosing the ‘Tisch’ building elevator isn’t the biggest Cliché after the ATM.
Analysing its level of the interactivity (as Crawford said, interactivity of things can be measured by a scale rather than a yes/no test) I would put the elevator somewhere around medium on that scale. It receives an input from humans and acts upon it, but not in a very sophisticated way. The human chooses to go up or down, and then chooses a floor. The elevator receives the choice info, processes and goes to the specified floor. It gets directions from the human but does not conduct a dialogue with it. The “thought” is not very complex, you tell it what to do and it does.
What interests me the most in elevators was the feedback, a crucial aspect that didn’t receive proper treatment in this specific elevator.
How fast can you tell which of these floors is selected? What if your’e in a rush? The lack of contrast between the on/off lights and the rest of the panel leads many people to press the buttons they need twice or more, just in case. I heard that somewhere there is an elevator with an undo function. Pressing the button twice cancels the selection. Hoping this is not an urban legend, if the function was used in this elevator it would be a disaster because the second press would lead to cancellation and also confusion.
Whoever designed this panel decided to give the up/down arrows and the floor numbers the same type of graphic treatment. Instead of placing the arrows in a height that is immediate, eye level height, these arrows require head lifting. Once your head is up, there is also the time it takes to tell what you are looking at.
If you are not on the ground flood, telling if the elevator goes up or down actually involves peeking into it. I think placing the arrows in a spot that is more visible and noticeable from the outside would be very helpful.