oDesk Recommendations

  • 231 views
Uploaded on

Client project from SI622.

Client project from SI622.

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
231
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion ODESK: AN ONLINE JOB MARKETPLACE THAT CONNECTS GLOBAL FREELANCERS AND BUSINESSES •Major functions: Job search, messaging, skills tests •Our focus: Designers from the US, South Asia and Eastern Europe searching for, applying to, and completing jobs Our goal: Form recommendations that oDesk can implement in small team projects •
  • 2. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion PRIMARY PERSONA: MEET ALFONS NOWICKI GENDER AGE LOCATION OCCUPATION EDUCATION Male 52 Poland Graphic Designer B.A. in Advertising TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE % INCOME FROM ODESK ODESK HOURLY RATE YEARS ON ODESK 100% $40 USD 5 years NEEDS Simple and efficient tool to work with clients and  team members Option to choose between fixed and hourly rates Ability to work at least 30 hours a week “oDesk was the beginning of my second life.” GOALS Provide for self and family Stay up to date in his technical skills and software Extend professional connections and work with  international clients
  • 3. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion A VARIETY OF RESEARCH METHODS GENERATED ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE ODESK Interview 5 interviewees from US, South Asia and Eastern Europe Usability Testing 5 independent contractors 3 tasks: searching for jobs, applying to jobs and taking a skills test Survey 1,435 Responses; 24% Response Rate Recommendations Heuristic Evaluation Comparative Analysis Individual evaluations using Nielsen’s ten heuristics 10 different direct, analogous, partial and parallel comparisons
  • 4. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE JOB SEARCH EVIDENCE SEVERITY  Search tools & boxes lack transparency (Usability testing,  • • • • Heuristic Evaluation) Job & search categories do not match the real world (Survey,  Heuristic Evaluation) Competitors offer a more comprehensive job search (Comparative Analysis, Survey) Absence of tracking a specific job (Comparative Analysis, Heuristic  Evaluation)
  • 5. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE JOB SEARCH RECOMMENDATION  Explicitly state search capabilities Refine job search categories Provide more search options that designers desire Add the ability to track a specific job • • • • SEVERITY 
  • 6. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED A BETTER MESSAGING SYSTEM EVIDENCE SEVERITY  Small attachment size limits (Interview, Comparative Analysis) Cannot contact clients without an oDesk account (Interview) Contractors want message filters and search options • • • • (Interview, Survey, Comparative Analysis) Absence of online chat & mobile alerts (Interview, Comparative  Analysis, Survey)
  • 7. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED A BETTER MESSAGING SYSTEM RECOMMENDATION  SEVERITY  Increase the attachment size Create a searchable message system with email integration Add an online messenger for designers to connect with clients • • •
  • 8. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED CLEARER NAVIGATIONAL LABELS EVIDENCE SEVERITY  Test Score page and the help center lack breadcrumb navigation to indicate users' current locations (Heuristic  • Evaluation) •Sent job applications lack noticeable labels in “userfriendly” language (Heuristic Evaluation, Usability Testing) Submenu “Profile” and “Find Jobs” under the main menu “Find Work” are confusing (Heuristic Evaluation, Usability Testing) •
  • 9. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion DESIGNERS NEED CLEARER NAVIGATIONAL LABELS RECOMMENDATION SEVERITY  Add navigational hints or breadcrumb bar Unify the term “work” and “job” Add obvious feedback for job application status in “userfriendly” language • • •
  • 10. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion SKILLS TESTS ARE DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE, LACKING VISIBILITY AND FEEDBACK SEVERITY  EVIDENCE During the test, users cannot see the test title, and the timer is fixed (Heuristic Evaluation) Test history is not shown in the test center (Heuristic  • • Evaluation, Usability Testing) •Too many specific categories to scan quickly (Usability  Testing) •Time durations on instructions sometimes conflict (Heuristic Evaluation, Usability Testing) •No visible clues to tell users how to pause a test and resume it later (Heuristic Evaluation, Usability Testing)
  • 11. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion SKILLS TESTS ARE DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE, LACKING VISIBILITY AND FEEDBACK SEVERITY  RECOMMENDATION Partition the Skills Test landing page into different sections such as “My Skills Tests” and “All Skills Test” to show users’ test history and status •
  • 12. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion SKILLS TESTS ARE DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE, LACKING VISIBILITY AND FEEDBACK SEVERITY  RECOMMENDATION Provide clear visual clues to let users know how to resume a test More noticeable instructions on how to pause and resume a test Broader skills test categories & unified time durations in instruction page • • •
  • 13. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion KEY AREAS THAT WERE MISSED What happens after the contractors are hired for a job? Our project scope mainly focused on the functionalities of job search, job application and skills tests, which are limited to the usability before the contractor are actually hired by the clients. Time tracker Wallet function Messaging Transactions
  • 14. Overview Methods Findings Discussion FURTHER STUDIES • Usability tests with the target audience South Asia Eastern Europe Conclusion
  • 15. Overview Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion QUESTIONS? Contact us at annasr@umich.edu