Cheap and efficient user testing tools allow organizations to engage users in design when budgets are limited. Image map prototypes require no coding and can be built in hours, enabling initial user testing of static pages. Combining standard in-lab testing with informal on-site testing allows for more iterative design based on user feedback. This approach provides valuable insights while keeping costs low.

1. Cheap and efficient tools
Engaging users in design when there is no budget and there is no time

2. iQ Content
iQ Content
Usability | Design | Content | Analytics
0:00 / 4:59
2

3. Does this sound familiar?
“We won’t be doing any user testing
for this project. There is just no
budget for it, and we don’t have
time“
3

4. The Holy Trinity
Quick
User
research
Cheap Valuable
4

5. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
My night at the Odeon Nua
Sarah is joining Nua
What people say: Photos:
What do you like?
Far far away, behind the word
mountains,
This week's offers Nua
Post Upload!
Far far away, Far far away, Far far away,
behind the word behind the word behind the word
mountains, mountains, mountains,
Vote! Vote! Vote!
5

6. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
My night at the Odeon Nua
What people say: Photos:
Far far away, behind the word
mountains,
Post Upload!
6

7. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
Traffic analysis
Before After
7

8. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
Quick
IMAGE MAP PROTOTYPES
User
research
Cheap Valuable
8

9. 9

10. 10

11. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
GOOD THINGS:
Not a single line of code
required
11

12. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
MORE GOOD THINGS:
Starting from existing
wireframes, an image map
prototype can be built by an
interaction designer in 3 to 5
hours
12

13. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
EVEN MORE GOOD THINGS:
Image map prototypes
provide enough interactivity
to test static web pages
13

14. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
BAD THINGS:
You can’t use them to test
pages that require user input
or move (i.e. web forms,
animations, effects,
transitions, etc)
14

15. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
Quick
HYBRID PROTOTYPES
User
research
Cheap Valuable
15

16. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
16

17. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
17

18. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
18

19. Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis
http://url.ie/2i4h
19

20. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
Quick
USER research
TESTING
User
Cheap Valuable
20

21. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
STANDARD APPROACH:
Tests carried out in lab with 2
laptops (Windows OS), USB
keyboard and mouse, monitor,
webcam, microphone and Morae
21

22. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
STANDARD APPROACH:
Protocol: 6 to 8 participants
compensated with €60 - €70
for 1-hour tests spread along
2 days
22

23. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH:
Tests carried out in client’s point
of contact with customers (e.g.
bank branch) with 2 laptops (Mac
OS), USB keyboard and mouse,
monitor and Silverback
23

24. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH:
Protocol: 15 to 20 participants
compensated with €20 for 15-
minute tests spread along 2
days
24

25. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH GOOD
THINGS:
Cheaper and faster
25

26. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
USER TESTING WITH 7 USERS:
FIXED COSTS VARIABLE COSTS DAYS
STANDARD €3,385 €1,700 2
INFORMAL €2,940 €140 1
26

27. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH BAD
THINGS:
Impossible to recruit
participants of a certain profile
27

28. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH BAD
THINGS:
Participants will be already your
client’s customers: you’ll learn
nothing about prospective
customers’ behaviour
28

29. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
INFORMAL APPROACH BAD
THINGS:
Tests must be short and very
focused: no time for pre-test
questionnaires or debriefing
interviews
29

30. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
THE TRICK: USE BOTH
Use the standard approach for
exploration, and the informal
approach for validation
30

31. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
THE BENEFIT: MORE ITERATIONS
Combining the standard and informal
approaches, we have squeezed one
more round of user testing in our
projects
31

32. Prototyping User testing
User testing Traffic analysis
THE BENEFIT: MORE ITERATIONS
Before: 2 rounds of standard testing
After: 1 round of standard testing, 2
rounds of informal testing
32

34. =

35. Our initial assumption
Testing IA = Card sorting

36. Donna Spencer:
Card sorting is a “tool that helps us
understand people we are
designing for”

37. Testing IA = Card sorting

38. Piece 1: Identify key user tasks

39. Piece 2 - carefully craft wording

40. Piece 3: image map prototypes x 2

41. The tests - Round 1
 12 users
 2 days
 initially tested the live site as well
 rotated which version was served first

42. Key insights
 Visible second level nav was critical
 Home link very useful
 Terminology, like “plans & costs” vs. “plans & services”

43. Round 2
 Validate new IA
 Focus on new and existing page designs
 Just 5 users this time

44. What did the prototypes do for us?
 Ease of prototyping
allowed us to
quickly adapt to
completely new
test plan
 Shrunk distance
between testing
artefact and the
real thing
 Made us confident
in our result