• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Cheap And Efficient Tools Euroia09
 

Cheap And Efficient Tools Euroia09

on

  • 2,981 views

iQ Content's presentation at EuroIA Copenhagen 2009

iQ Content's presentation at EuroIA Copenhagen 2009

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,981
Views on SlideShare
2,667
Embed Views
314

Actions

Likes
8
Downloads
38
Comments
0

4 Embeds 314

http://marcelzimmermann.wordpress.com 306
http://know.namics.com 6
http://www.slideshare.net 1
http://www.diymobileusabilitytesting.net 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Cheap And Efficient Tools Euroia09 Cheap And Efficient Tools Euroia09 Presentation Transcript

    • Cheap and efficient tools Engaging users in design when there is no budget and there is no time
    • iQ Content iQ Content Usability | Design | Content | Analytics 0:00 / 4:59 2
    • 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
    • The Holy Trinity Quick User research Cheap Valuable 4
    • 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
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis Traffic analysis Before After 7
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis Quick IMAGE MAP PROTOTYPES User research Cheap Valuable 8
    • 9
    • 10
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis GOOD THINGS: Not a single line of code required 11
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis EVEN MORE GOOD THINGS: Image map prototypes provide enough interactivity to test static web pages 13
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis Quick HYBRID PROTOTYPES User research Cheap Valuable 15
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis 16
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis 17
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis 18
    • Prototyping User testing Traffic analysis http://url.ie/2i4h 19
    • Prototyping User testing User testing Traffic analysis Quick USER research TESTING User Cheap Valuable 20
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing User testing Traffic analysis INFORMAL APPROACH GOOD THINGS: Cheaper and faster 25
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing User testing Traffic analysis INFORMAL APPROACH BAD THINGS: Impossible to recruit participants of a certain profile 27
    • 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
    • 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
    • Prototyping User testing User testing Traffic analysis THE TRICK: USE BOTH Use the standard approach for exploration, and the informal approach for validation 30
    • 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
    • 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
    • =
    • Our initial assumption Testing IA = Card sorting
    • Donna Spencer: Card sorting is a “tool that helps us understand people we are designing for”
    • Testing IA = Card sorting
    • Piece 1: Identify key user tasks
    • Piece 2 - carefully craft wording
    • Piece 3: image map prototypes x 2
    • The tests - Round 1  12 users  2 days  initially tested the live site as well  rotated which version was served first
    • Key insights  Visible second level nav was critical  Home link very useful  Terminology, like “plans & costs” vs. “plans & services”
    • Round 2  Validate new IA  Focus on new and existing page designs  Just 5 users this time
    • 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