After completing my prototype I chose to gather user feedback to find out what areas needed to be improved for the final application. I encouraged the test users to explore and use the application and make their own notes to simulate how the finished work would be used in real life. After they had completed their exploration I held an informal, group discussion, which I recorded on video, to talk about all aspects of the application, those the participants liked and areas they felt could be improved.

I held two focus groups; this first group consisted of IMD students that are very knowledgeable about the design process and how it is undertaken during a project. The second group consisted of students that studied Architecture, Law and Product Design. I chose these students to test the application to see if it could be used and understood by people, potential Clients, who either have no previous knowledge of the design process or maybe used a slightly different process in their work.

IMD Users

When asked about the layout of the application, all agreed that the layout was clear but that the video screen could be bigger and text size should be increased in the information box. I had already thought about an idea that the video could be enlarged and pop up in the middle of the screen and then closed again after watching the clip to return to the menus. This would have the benefit that space would be created to expand the text therefore increasing the font size is possible.

I told the group that I was trying to explain the design process and asked if there were any additional ideas to help do this. Everyone agreed that some form of movement or animation to show movement through the process would really help in the sub menus. I really liked the idea of animating the sub menus to show how this process stage would in theory run through a project. The user could play the animation and then on completion would be able to use the menus normally again.

Our discussion then moved onto the benefits of developing a set of icons to help relate the tasks that I present with classic project measures such as cost and time. The group suggested various ways to achieve this such as varying the shades of colour on the sub menu and using simple animated symbols.

The group thought that the related content was a good idea and complemented the text but it could be made clearer, specifically how each section of content relates to other areas of the process. The content should just be used to help further inform the user and provide additional information to complement the diagram but the content should not explain the diagram.

Another suggestion was made to enhance the point that design is not sequential and that no process is the same would be to use a disclaimer screen at the front of the application. This screen would explain that no process is the same and it can take much iteration to get the correct solution, re-enforcing the message within the application.

Non – IMD Users

The group agreed that it was important to bring in additional menus to keep the user interested and not give the impression that all the information was contain within the text. I suggested the sub menu animation idea that had been discussed during the first user group testing as this idea would work well and also help show that the buttons can be used.

Reflections on Testing

After performing the testing there were areas where the application performs to the standard required and some that need to be improved. I am happy that the general structure and layout of the application should remain the same as it is simple and doesn’t distract from the information.

Placing example text in the top level of the application really helped give the testers an idea of what content would be present in the final application and also alerted me to try and not use design jargon in the text segments.

The areas that can be improved are the sub menus and how the related content (audio, video and animation) is displayed. I am keen to produce and test an animated sub menu to complement the navigation buttons.

Another area that I will investigate would be the development of a set of symbols or icons to provide more information about how the steps and sub steps relate to project measurable factors such as time and cost.

The focus/user group was the right type of user testing to perform, as the prototype application was not suited for testing with structured user tasks.