CSG Spring 2016 -UX Design

Jenn Stringer – Berkeley

Design thinking –

  • Empathize – understanding the person’s problem
  • Define – Clearly articulate
  • Ideate – Brainstorm
  • Prototype
  • Test

Creating service experiences that work for the users – aligned with IT Service Management.(?) UX people were the ones who really understood that it was about the entire experience.

Don’t confuse UI design with UX design – UI is what people use to interact with your product/service, and the UX design is how they feel when they do it.

Ideation exercise – what to do with all those single socks?

Design Thinking & Service Deliver (Berkeley) – Judith Stern, UX Designer, Daphne Ogle, Service Experience Designer (new title and field).

Evangelizing an inside/out approach

  • Campus UCD group, with actual titles (13 on campus)
  • Advocated for UX roles on campus – group meets on a monthly basis
  • UX embedded in ETS service & product projects

People confuse UI and UX design

Case study: Academic Innovation Studio, launching in the fall.

  • Ed Tech, Research Computing, and center for teaching and learning collaborating.
  • Negotiated 3,000 square feet for faculty-facing innovation space, taking a user focused approach.
  • Creating a safe place for exploration and risk-taking, learn from colleagues.
  • Focused specifically on technology.
  • Brings research together with teaching and learning.
  • Rolled out Minimal Viable Service.
  • Did Field Research – go to where the users are to see how they really work.
  • Analysis, synthesis of research – created personas for faculty members. Used them with faculty and staff to do service mapping and brainstorming.
  • Used Vision Cards with faculty in workshop – cards of abstract images and pick out a few and ask how they describe current service experiences, and what they want the future to be. Helped people to focus beyond complaining.
  • Ideal Experience Mapping – ask users to map an ideal experience.
  • Used mapping and vision cards to derive key principles.
  • Held a floorplay workshop to help define the use of the physical space for the activities.
  • Body Storming – Figure it out by trying it out in the actual space.
  • Will do some evaluation of the experience at the end of the first year.

Journey Mapping – Map customer’s journey over time through our service

  • Looked at faculty use of clickers.
  • Mapped current experience, proposed soft launch experience, and full launch experience.
  • Found moments of truth that came out of the activity.

Service Blueprinting

Mystery shopping – Ask users to secretly visit service and give feedback.

Idea is to get to continuous service improvement.

CalCentral: Quantifying Qualitative Data

  • Student portal built at Berkely, going to be front face of  PeopleSoft student.
  • Experience Mapping Workshop – Listening to students.
  • From interviews quantified experiences using sentiment words “I liked”, “I was frustrated”, etc. Way to show functional owners what people said.

Barbara Puccio, Duke Web Services; Mary McKee, Duke Identity Management

Goal to have user workflow drive new features and innovation – convert strategy from building features to actually solving customer problems and pain points. This is a shift in thinking – need to get people to buy into understanding that the research should be done up front.

Web Gifts Project – rebuilding a site.

  • Many stakeholders – hard to step away from decisions by committee.
  • Interviewed all the stakeholders.
  • Stakeholder Goal = simplicity
  • Creative and UX (CrUX) goal = integrate pleasure, fow, and meaning.
    • stakeholders were focused on transactional process
    • giving is an emotional experience.
  • Defined user scenarios
    • there were a lot of fields on the current forms, and stakeholders were invested
    • Asked what the users really need to fill out to do the transaction.
  • Lesson learned – stakeholders and functional owners are NOT the users.

Good Metrics Are: Proactive/comprehensive/value-based; measured over time (so need to be consistent); transparent – hard to make decisions if people are working with different data; scalable; flexible (better to track numbers rather than percentages) … and sometimes inconvenient

  • People like to talk about how, not what – have to understand what the problems are that need solving.

Duke OneLink (social/saml gateway)

  • Stakeholder values and goals often incompatible.  Need to go back to defining values – people having a good experience getting an account and understanding what it means.
  • Came to decision to make logs available to all stakeholders with central support.
  • Perception is that different demographics have different needs and experiences.
  • Good metrics let you say “yes” – monitoring allows you to be less restrictive in policies.
  • Users must understand where they fit in the picture. Need to show enough to understand context.
  • Avoid “checkbox culture’; start a dialogue with users.

UX Design at Rice University – DIane Butler, AVP

  • Looking to do major overhaul of library web site.
  • #1 problem is undergraduates go to Google, not the Library site.
  • Past problems
    • Too cluttered, too many pages, most used items not on top level, confusing terminology
  • Who are the users?
    • not the librarians
    • Faculty, undergrads, and grad students
    • Staff not so much
    • Talked to Students, faculty, library staff, friends of the library group
  • Looked at Google Analytics for page usage
    • #1 was study rooms, which wasn’t on top level
    • hours information was also important
    • lots of other pages had their use correlated with librarian usage
  • Did a survey and held focus groups
  • Performed usability testing of current site
    • watch where people fail
  • Built first prototype, then solicited additional feedback via more focus groups
    • Best feedback was from faculty on the Library committee, because they were already together in a room. Were very honest with feedback.  Faculty wanted site not to be “dumbed down”, e.g. more refined than Google.
    • Did targeted “guerilla testing

Canvas – did user testing with Canvas as part of a pilot

  • Found where faculty have problems, will use that to address training and documentation.

UW Madison – UXD Journey

Portal redesign – everyone uses the My UW for something. Was too cluttered, driven largely by admin offices.

New design – used design thinking. In the beginning was Linda Jorn, who advocated for design thinking in IT. Hired first design consultant.

Started with goal of doing project as cheaply and quickly as possible, but design consultant stopped that, but advocated really understanding needs and using principles.

Big flip is to starting from a user perspective instead of a functional office perspective.

Used uservoice to submit ideas and vote on them.

Brought groups together for a week long workshop to understand the needs. A significant commitment of resources, but big payback. Starting to use it for other purposes, not just UX design. Goes from brainstorming through prototyping.

Institutional Bureaucracy Mind Meld

UX design is now backed into agile development process.

Service Design at Tufts – Mairead Martin

Consolidated fifteen organizations into one IT org.

Service Design stood up, reporting to CIO. Includes enterprise architecture

  • Staff of six: Director, Two enterprise architects, UX lead/practitioner, UX/UI designer, UX researcher.
  • Available for consultation with nits.
  • Strategic projects
    • Connect Tufts – bundled collaborative cloud tools with better UI
    • Access Tufts – gateway to business functions.
      • Abstract the user experience rather than send people directly to multiple applications.
  • What we know at this point – this is new
    • Model – immersive or does service team parachute in?
    • Integration with service design key.
    • How to deal with services already in the wild? Service remediation. Hoping to shift mindset.
    • Time/resource requirements
    • Personnel/Expertise – don’t always have resources in house. Have identified outside companies for enhancing capacity.
    • Metrics and KPIs – how do you measure success?

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s