Using Qualitative Data in the Development of Personas

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

more share options
Embed For WordPress.com

Without related presentations

Goals and MethodologyGoals: Gauge the needs of users as they find and use information or resources in order tohelp inform the selection and implementation of a discovery system.Methodology: Structured interviews were conducted with 78 Hopkins affiliates, includingundergraduates, faculty, research staff, and administrators from the Krieger School of Arts andSciences, Whiting School of Engineering, School of Advanced International Studies, Peabody Institute,Carey School of Business, School of Education, School of Medicine, and Applied Physics Laboratory.Interviewees were prompted to describe a recent instance they needed to find resources or information,demonstrating their process whenever possible. Follow-up questions and observation ascertained typicaland preferred discovery behaviors, organization and sharing habits, and related behavior.

Members of the Public Interface Group, and many of their colleagues, conducted interviews with 78 JHU affiliates in the spring of 2008,prompting the interviewees to walk the interviewer through a recent instance they needed to find resourcesor information. Follow-up questions ascertained typical and preferred discovery behaviors, organization andsharing habits, and related behavior. Principal Investigator Sue Woodson led a small group, including Steve Sears and Sharon Morris, in a first round of analysis focused on identifying features important to discovery. This was put to use by the Post Horizon Working Group to support evaluating features in potential products.A second analysis process centered around segmenting users in order to develop personas as design and implementation aids for the Post Horizon Working Group was undertaken by a second small group of Liz Uzelac, Ashley Conaway, and Leigh Anne Palmer.

This analysis and writing was resource-intensive: the multiple readings, codings, analysis, and drafting took an estimated 125 hours following the initial data presentation.

Data presentation: Team members identified themes that corresponded to several persona compenents and identified the portions of interview transcripts that corresponded to these themes. The smaller analysis team then read each transcript, identified patterns within themes, and then identified clusters of themes in order to segment users. These clusters became the basis of the personas that follow. Interview transcripts were analyzed and mapped to the below targeted themes and their componentcategories, then read multiple times to determine and verify patterns within themes.Themes (with component categories)Profile (role, discipline, work environment, technology)Favorites (frequently used resources, starting points)Goals and Motivations (tasks, projects)Feelings and FrustrationsStrategies (key features and indicators of relevance)Personal Organization, Sharing, and Delivery PracticesInterviews were then clustered by coinciding patterns in order to segment users. The clusters (sampled below) became the basis of a set of six personas.

Interviews clustered distinctly based on behaviors and preferences, not role or discipline. While the personas at right include roles and disciplines, do not generalize about those groups based the attributes of any one persona.

Browser: Characterized by physical and online browsing habits, including “more like this” recommendation systems; prefers discovery through serendipity.Complex Searcher: Characterized by highly structured discovery methods using limits, controlled vocabulary, and fielded searching; shares information online.Simplicity Seeker: Characterized by strong preference for single search box keyword-style searching as well asfeelings of information overload; values aesthetics and speed.Data Cruncher: Characterized by heavy use of subscription resources and robust methods for organizing and managing information.Guide: Characterized by teaching activities, use of a wide variety of scholarly, popular, and other resources; concerned about quality research.Advice Seeker: Characterized by tendency to seek out expert guidance as a key starting point for discovery process; values assistance to ameliorate confusion.Next… make these flesh:What is a persona?Personas are archetypal users that represent the needs, goals, values, and behaviors of larger groups of patrons. Acting as stand-ins for real users, personas are tools that help guide design teams in making decisions about the functionality and design of software. By identifying patrons’ behaviors and what drives them, personas bring users to life by giving them names, personalities, and faces. While these personas are fictitious,they are based on the behaviors of real patrons -- information derived from the careful analysis of 78 user needs assessment interviews.

How are personas helpful?Understanding the needs of users is critical to the success of any project. Personas will help us to identify and communicate user needs efficiently and effectively. Prioritizing development and design based on personas will help the Post-Horizon Working Group avoid the trap of building what we think users want, freeing us to design a discovery tool by considering what patrons use and value. As development proceeds, many disagreements over design decisions can be sorted out by referring back to the personas. Additionally, we can frequently evaluate designs using the personas.By referring to personas as ‘stand-in’ users, the team can concentrate on designing for these archetypal users with the confidence that the needs of the broader user groups will be met. As the personas are based on real user interviews, this will help ensure the team has a tool for data-driven decision making. Specifically, the team might use personas to:•Communicate to HILTS and the ULC how the product will meet user needs (done)•Make design decisions about how specific functionality will work•Focus additional user analysis activities, such as task analysis•Develop scenarios for usability testing•Assist in recruitment strategy for usability testingOne challenge teams often face is remembering to hold themselves accountable for considering personas and data derived from assessment activities when strong feelings about a product or process exist in the team itself. To help ameliorate these tendencies, we recommend considering the below techniques:•Posting the personas around the walls of the room the team meets in as a visualreminder to include them in your process•Develop a mantra such as “What would Ryan do/think?” to incorporate the personas inthe evaluation activities and decisions of the team•Assign a point person on the team to keep the team honest when the data-driven aidsare neglected in favor of assumptions.•Develop an evaluation tool that incorporates the earlier team work on features with thebehaviors and features described in the personas

1 Favorite

cpikas favorited this 5 months ago

Using Qualitative Data in the Development of Personas - Presentation Transcript

What Do People Need in a Discovery System?
Using Qualitative Data in the Development of Personas
Please stand if you were involved in the planning and analysis retreats.
Please stand if you were involved in conducting the interviews.
Interviews
Please tell us about your work or research.
An instance you needed to find information or materials.
How did you look for what you needed?
How did you identify what would be most useful?
What did you do after you found something?
Did you share your information or resources?
Would you say this situation typical?
Word Cloud: http://www.wordle.net/
In this area…
Subject Area ≠ Needs & Behavior
User Category ≠ Needs & Behavior
Why Personas?
…designs with superior usability characteristics were produced.
…a significant advantage during the research and conceptualisation stages of the design process (supporting previously unfounded claims).
-Long, F. ”Real or Imaginary: The effectiveness of using personas in product design.” Irish Ergonomics Review, Proceedings of the IES Conference. 2009.
Meet Your Constituents
Meet Your Constituents
Meet Your Constituents
Meet Your Constituents
Meet Your Constituents
Meet Your Constituents
Other Findings
Our users have expectations, even if they have workarounds. They’re aware of what might be, even if only in their gut.
If we can plan for the time this sort of work takes, being able to internalize the results can be valuable, even assumption-busting.