Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
User Research Portfolio3
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

User Research Portfolio3

659

Published on

This deck introduces my work experience, orientation toward UCD and proven results at several companies meeting interesting interaction challenges.

This deck introduces my work experience, orientation toward UCD and proven results at several companies meeting interesting interaction challenges.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
659
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
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
  • “Positioning myself at the intersection of…My degree is in Cognitive Psychology. I am interested in the human behavior in work, play and casual situations.My first exposure to Human Factors was in an Industrial Psychology course where the professor presented the case of the design of aircraft controls that led to crashes. In one craft, pulling back lifted the nose, in another pushing the stick forward did the same thing. 50+ years ago the military was losing pilots who transferred between these craft with some minimum hours of training. Well under pressure, people perform the way with which they have had the most experience. They pull back and crash the plane. Later this was even more real to me when I was involved in Air Traffic Control training.As a result, I have spent a lot of my career making sure that software / hardware designs do not lead people to make mistakes. Especially mission critical ones.
  • “Positioning myself at the intersection of…My degree is in Cognitive Psychology. I am interested in the human behavior in work, play and casual situations.My first exposure to Human Factors was in an Industrial Psychology course where the professor presented the case of the design of aircraft controls that led to crashes. In one craft, pulling back lifted the nose, in another pushing the stick forward did the same thing. 50+ years ago the military was losing pilots who transferred between these craft with some minimum hours of training. Well under pressure, people perform the way with which they have had the most experience. They pull back and crash the plane. Later this was even more real to me when I was involved in Air Traffic Control training.As a result, I have spent a lot of my career making sure that software / hardware designs do not lead people to make mistakes. Especially mission critical ones.
  • Every new company is an opportunity to learn a new business domain.OBA was an opportunity to learn about multi-dimensional cubes, data mining, and Business Intelligence. This transferred nicely to the DUET project which was a Joint Venture with SAP. We wanted to expose queries from their database in Outlook task panes to support hard to do with SAP tasks such as Travel Management, Time Management, and Budget Management.At the Cobalt Group I installed usability processes into the company, earned the trust of account executives, project managers, designers and others who did not understand what usability could do for them and their products. Very interesting job cut short by 9/11.Expedia and Worldspan are travel reservation companies that involve high volume transaction processing and the display / comparison of prices and services. They are B2B and B2C. At Worldspan myself and an expert on their transaction processing facility did the analysis and planning for their online travel reservation application.MAPICS was formerly a division of IBM. I did design and usability for their conversion from character based UI to OO client and web based UI. They provide huge capacity inventory systems and business planning and control systems.At NCR I was involved in many customer site visits to gather design data for an online multi-media training program for the Office of Pipeline Safety for the use of combustible gas detectors. Planned and performed interviews, walked with pipeline technicians to detect leaks in the field and learned to use the equipment. Ghostbusters…
  • Every new company is an opportunity to learn a new business domain.OBA was an opportunity to learn about multi-dimensional cubes, data mining, and Business Intelligence. This transferred nicely to the DUET project which was a Joint Venture with SAP. We wanted to expose queries from their database in Outlook task panes to support hard to do with SAP tasks such as Travel Management, Time Management, and Management.BudgetAt the Cobalt Group I installed usability processes into the company, earned the trust of account executives, project managers, designers and others who did not understand what usability could do for them and their products. Very interesting job cut short by 9/11.Expedia and Worldspan are travel reservation companies that involve high volume transaction processing and the display / comparison of prices and services. They are B2B and B2C. At Worldspan myself and an expert on their transaction processing facility did the analysis and planning for their online travel reservation application.MAPICS was formerly a division of IBM. I did design and usability for their conversion from character based UI to OO client and web based UI. They provide huge capacity inventory systems and business planning and control systems.At NCR I was involved in many customer site visits to gather design data for an online multi-media training program for the Office of Pipeline Safety for the use of combustible gas detectors. Planned and performed interviews, walked with pipeline technicians to detect leaks in the field and learned to use the equipment. Ghostbusters…
  • Goal – apply the right methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design.There is no one way to do usability.We can’t use a mechanical factory approach The methods to be used depend on the problems to be investigated and: Time frame Money ResourcesApproach great design – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the goodBecome a domain expert – know the software domain. Know enough to: Take the user’s place in the beginning Be able to talk to and question the user Be able to observe the user and gather meaningful, valid, reliable data Close contact with users – Get the user’s story of useobserve real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. What are their contexts of use: social, environmental, mental, etc. Interact with users; interview, question, probe, express your real interestFront End Analysis and Ideation– Fix design errors at the beginning where they are cheap and don’t hurt other parts of the applicationDescribe the objectives for the product; multiple dimensions; UX, value to customer, value to company, position vs. competition, etc. Research – Begin with product team: What do we need to know? What are the team’s uncertainties/ Issues? What alternatives to consider? What are the limits on the design from time, resources, money, technology?User Oriented Design – Design for the Real WorldGoal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situationTask and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainmentContext based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design?
  • Goal – apply the right methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design.There is no one way to do usability.We can’t use a mechanical factory approach The methods to be used depend on the problems to be investigated and: Time frame Money ResourcesApproach great design – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the goodBecome a domain expert – know the software domain. Know enough to: Take the user’s place in the beginning Be able to talk to and question the user Be able to observe the user and gather meaningful, valid, reliable data Close contact with users – Get the user’s story of useobserve real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. What are their contexts of use: social, environmental, mental, etc. Interact with users; interview, question, probe, express your real interestFront End Analysis and Ideation– Fix design errors at the beginning where they are cheap and don’t hurt other parts of the applicationDescribe the objectives for the product; multiple dimensions; UX, value to customer, value to company, position vs. competition, etc. Research – Begin with product team: What do we need to know? What are the team’s uncertainties/ Issues? What alternatives to consider? What are the limits on the design from time, resources, money, technology?User Oriented Design – Design for the Real WorldGoal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situationTask and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainmentContext based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design?
  • Goal – apply the right methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design.There is no one way to do usability.We can’t use a mechanical factory approach The methods to be used depend on the problems to be investigated and: Time frame Money ResourcesApproach great design – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the goodBecome a domain expert – know the software domain. Know enough to: Take the user’s place in the beginning Be able to talk to and question the user Be able to observe the user and gather meaningful, valid, reliable data Close contact with users – Get the user’s story of useobserve real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. What are their contexts of use: social, environmental, mental, etc. Interact with users; interview, question, probe, express your real interestFront End Analysis and Ideation– Fix design errors at the beginning where they are cheap and don’t hurt other parts of the applicationDescribe the objectives for the product; multiple dimensions; UX, value to customer, value to company, position vs. competition, etc. Research – Begin with product team: What do we need to know? What are the team’s uncertainties/ Issues? What alternatives to consider? What are the limits on the design from time, resources, money, technology?User Oriented Design – Design for the Real WorldGoal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situationTask and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainmentContext based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design?
  • Goal – apply the right methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design.There is no one way to do usability.We can’t use a mechanical factory approach The methods to be used depend on the problems to be investigated and: Time frame Money ResourcesApproach great design – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the goodBecome a domain expert – know the software domain. Know enough to: Take the user’s place in the beginning Be able to talk to and question the user Be able to observe the user and gather meaningful, valid, reliable data Close contact with users – Get the user’s story of useobserve real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. What are their contexts of use: social, environmental, mental, etc. Interact with users; interview, question, probe, express your real interestFront End Analysis and Ideation– Fix design errors at the beginning where they are cheap and don’t hurt other parts of the applicationDescribe the objectives for the product; multiple dimensions; UX, value to customer, value to company, position vs. competition, etc. Research – Begin with product team: What do we need to know? What are the team’s uncertainties/ Issues? What alternatives to consider? What are the limits on the design from time, resources, money, technology?User Oriented Design – Design for the Real WorldGoal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situationTask and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainmentContext based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design?
  • Goal – apply the right methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design.There is no one way to do usability.We can’t use a mechanical factory approach The methods to be used depend on the problems to be investigated and: Time frame Money ResourcesApproach great design – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the goodBecome a domain expert – know the software domain. Know enough to: Take the user’s place in the beginning Be able to talk to and question the user Be able to observe the user and gather meaningful, valid, reliable data Close contact with users – Get the user’s story of useobserve real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. What are their contexts of use: social, environmental, mental, etc. Interact with users; interview, question, probe, express your real interestFront End Analysis and Ideation– Fix design errors at the beginning where they are cheap and don’t hurt other parts of the applicationDescribe the objectives for the product; multiple dimensions; UX, value to customer, value to company, position vs. competition, etc. Research – Begin with product team: What do we need to know? What are the team’s uncertainties/ Issues? What alternatives to consider? What are the limits on the design from time, resources, money, technology?User Oriented Design – Design for the Real WorldGoal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situationTask and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainmentContext based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design?
  • If you ask me what I am most proud of, it would be this study and the interactions with participants to make sure they had exposure to a range of features that satisfied needs which previous research had identified as important. I learned:People create a few types of diagrams.They typically use a handful of shapes per diagram type.They have pain trying to find the six shapes they need on 5 different stencils.They have several workarounds to have access to their typical shapes. This knowledge contributed to the Quick Shapes feature.Understanding user work practices and task flows is a key part of my approach. Because ODG did not do customer research or task analysis at the point in the release where I was assimilated into their group, I included task related observations and questions in my studies. This proved to be critical because I discovered some task flow patterns whereby users would never engage some features.What made this study such a peak experience? The combination and integration of features gave participants an unsolicited superlative user experience. One participant sat back after working on a task and said: “Wow, that was a treat.” As a group they were just taken aback with how this constellation of features improved their productivity, reduced the work they had to do to accomplish results and lessened the frustration they typically experienced. I’d like to show a short clip of one of these participants.
  • I’d like to briefly discuss each of these studies and how they fit together.During this same period, I ran other research along other lines:Data GraphicsVisio ServicesStructured Diagrams, CFF and the new Container concept
  • This study was at the end of a year of work and research. We worked on two main tasksTaking Visio to the Fluent UI, the ribbon.Designing / developing new and enhanced features.How did we get to the point where the features were mutually supporting and presented the user with a coherent approach to their work?We evolved a good design by asking good research questions and paying close attention to the participants even when we would have preferred other choices.We could do more, but they told us to do less.
  • In Visio, for the product’s lifetime, shapes have been in the shape’s window. This is a pane on the left side of the drawing window. Should we follow Fluent UI guidelines and put a shapes gallery in the ribbon, aka PowerPoint? Or do we fight for the right to be different?We should be different.
  • This study was at the end of a year of work and research. We worked on two main tasksTaking Visio to the Fluent UI, the ribbon.Designing / developing new and enhanced features.How did we get to the point where the features were mutually supporting and presented the user with a coherent approach to their work?We evolved a good design by asking good research questions and paying close attention to the participants even when we would have preferred other choices.We could do more, but they told us to do less.
  • Can we achieve what the spec requires:When deleting shapes, connectors are currently not deleted if not selected.For O14 we want to delete dangling connectors but not irritate the user.Can we formulate decision rules based on user input for devs to implement?According to the spec, the feature is successful if:“No relevant user data is lostThe user does no manual cleanup to the results in “common” casesThe automatic behavior reduces the number of steps a user must take to delete a shape in complex casesChanges to the user’s diagram are minimizedManual replace shape is no more difficult than it is today. (Note that the Auto-Connect “connect to neighbor behavior” makes it easy for the user to recreate connections.)”User convincingly stated: Don’t make things worse. Delete connectors when it is obvious. Respect my decision making and realize I may want to use than dangling connector.
  • This diagram was used in the study. This version shows the participant where to insert shapes and delete shapes. Indicated here, but not for the study were the horizontal and vertical mis-alignments that they were to fix.There are also spacing inconsistencies to fix which I didn’t want to show for sake of not cluttering an already busy diagram.These arrangements could be handled individually by selection and use of the align or space button, or with one click, and no selection, on the Smart Align and Space hero button.
  • Problem with Smart InsertCurrent task flow cuts the adjoining shapes and moves them apart. This destroys the trigger for Smart Insert.User task flow impacts probability of users engaging the feature.There is no UI for this feature until you hit the hit zone.Geoff’s recommendation (and PM agreed): education, PR, in-app training, promotion, user assistance, etc.My manager said: “We would never make any recommendation like that.” Manager was looking for a design solution. There isn’t one. You don’t grab the feature graphically and then apply it. It can be discovered by accident, but, to me, that is a poor way to have a feature announce itself to the user.Delete, on the other hand, works like a miracle.User deletes a shape and the diagram heals itself without their having to work. It is automatically engaged with the typical user task flow.
  • Some of the contributions I brought to the study were:Observing the impact of task flow on discovery and success with some of the new features.Probing behind the user’s first remarksAsking the users to make connections between features that supported each other, but not in obvious ways.Bringing my past experience with other studies and users to bear on the tasks for this one.
  • The pattern is a way to turn a group of recommendations into an approach.The pattern describes a solution to multiple problems without dealing with their exact specifics.This pattern is a modification of one standard format that has been defined for UI design pattern experts.Patterns have long been used in object oriented programming, but have come into user interface design and even into management practices. They originated with Christopher Alexander in architecture (bricks/mortar).
  • A UI pattern becomes a tactic for resolving fuzzy situations. It’s not a formula. It’s not a heuristic. Patterns have much more focus and direction than heuristics.
  • They could tell that these enhancements to the product would have a huge positive impact on their work with Visio.One of the things that I did was to ask them questions that directed them to engage and understand the relation of features so they would get a more holistic experience of working with the product. Participants vary widely in their facility with the product. Some have never engaged features that have been in the product for 10 + years. Pasteboard cache…. Never place a shape outside of the drawing page.Rather than tell them what to do, I would ask them how some condition occurred, or what some UI element meant, or if they wanted something different how would they change it, etc.
  • Transcript

    • 1. User Research &amp; Usability<br />Geoff Willcher, Ph.D.<br />Positioning myself at the intersection of People, Performance and Technology<br />
    • 2. UX Research Highlights<br /><ul><li> Brief Work and Experience History
    • 3. Technical Proficiencies:
    • 4. My UX Processes, Practices, and Capabilities
    • 5. Adaptable
    • 6. User Centered
    • 7. Collaborative
    • 8. Strategic Thinking:
    • 9. What is a Product?
    • 10. Information Architecture
    • 11. Experiences in multiple domains
    • 12. ID in the Trust domain
    • 13. Building Nicole: MBS Personas
    • 14. UCD: Driving Principles into Practice
    • 15. Innovation in Research Tactics: More than 5 ways to Inform your Team
    • 16. Challenging and Positive Work Experiences
    • 17. Four Research Challenges: Evolving a Peak User Experience
    • 18. Organizational Leadership
    • 19. Save the Company: Handling Orphan Bugs</li></li></ul><li>Brief Work History<br />ATT eCommerce – Att.com mobility <br />Emphasizing customer experience as well as user experience<br />Building low cost personas with knowledge we already have<br />Promoting researched based design guidelines<br />MS TWC / PAGO – Trust User Experience Solutions and Outreach<br />A peak work experience under an impressive leader<br />Tasked with deep dive research into user behavior for trust interactions (security, privacy, online safety)<br />Provided UX consulting services across a wide range of company products.<br />* position eliminated with company wide cost cutting.<br />MS Office Design Group – Visio Client and Services<br />Taking Visio to the Ribbon with Lab studies, cognitive walks and Sort-IT card sort<br />MS Office Business Applications (OBA) --<br />LOBI Platform – Database Interoperability – PM, Design, UX team work<br />DUET (SAP &amp; MS) – see SAP thru Outlook -- best study SAP had seen<br />Office for Sales – see CRM through Office apps – brought CRM realities tospecs – the meaning of “account” depends on what system you are in.<br />MS CRM – <br />Personas, Process Modeling and UX research for v2.<br />Heuristic Evaluation for Competitive Product Evaluation, labs studies.<br />MS Expedia – Web Travel Reservations<br />Changed silo interaction to dashboard; never went back<br />Created Heuristics Checklist<br />
    • 20. Brief Work History<br />Eclypsis (Alltel) – Healthcare – Remaking the TDS 7000 (Char UI)<br />Interaction modeling and prototyping, Object Modeling Tech, UML. <br />Joint Application Design w/ medical professionals – switched p’types from B to wireframe.<br />The Cobalt Group – Automotive Web B2B, B2C<br />Installed Usability into company processes / practices<br />Lead UX, won hearts and minds <br />Structured Walkthrough, Labs, Design Consultations, Expert Review<br />Worldspan – Agent Travel Reservations<br />Networking and Installation group<br />Network configuration observation and documentation<br />Web Reservation Site Info Architecture, UI specs, design evaluations<br />JHK / SAIC --Transportation Engineering<br />Highway Traffic Control Center site visits<br />Contextual Inquiry (CI), - Long Island Center – rebuild dispatcher workflow<br />NCR Human Interface Technology Center<br />Combustible Gas Detector Training project -- Ghostbusters<br />Interviews, Surveys, Field observation, CI., Focus Groups, Project Mgt.<br />MAPICS (formerly w/IBM) – ERP/MRP<br />Icon Guidelines, UX Guide, Expert Review, UML, Project Mgt.<br />
    • 21. My UX Processes - Adaptable<br />Goal – There is no one true method to apply to all usability / user research issues to gain perfect information. My goal is to apply good methods at the right time to the right issues to drive products toward optimal design. <br />Objectives:<br />Involve users early and often<br />Find big obvious problems with fast inexpensive methods<br />Iterate rapidly with converging methods<br />Adapt the research to the information needs and stage of the project<br />Approaches:<br />Engage users – at work, on web, in person, conference, correspondence, lab… <br />Observe real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. <br /> Interact with users; get beyond sterile mechanical data collection methods.<br />Front End Analysis and Ideation– put more time / money here to start off<br />Research: <br />Know the value of preference, pretend, performance and production studies<br />Use data driven personas; integrate persona attributes into task flows and use case scenarios <br />
    • 22. My UX Processes – User Oriented<br />Become a domain near expert – know the software domain<br />Close contact with users – <br />observe real work in real settings, not only simplified lab type scenarios. <br /> Interact with users; get beyond sterile mechanical data collection methods.<br />Research – <br />Use profile qualified participants<br />Derive profiles from customer research<br />Use data driven personas; integrate persona attributes into task flows and use case scenarios – MBS Sales / Marketing personas<br />User Oriented Design – Design for the Real World<br />Goal Based – what are the user’s goals with the system in this situation<br />Task and Workflow based – how do they do their work / play / search / entertainment<br />Context based – what are the situations in which they use the product; how do these affect design? <br />
    • 23. My UX Processes – Collaborative<br />Integrate strongly with people in all roles for a product / service: PM, Dev, Test, UA, Planning, Marketing, Manufacturing, Support…<br />UX doesn’t work in a silo, behind a wall or hide in an office<br />UX is not limited to recommendations about software design; any change to any aspect of the product that will achieve UX goals is in scope.<br />Usability, Design, UA are partners; <br />UX is very involved with Design in developing Interface and Interaction design,<br />UX brings knowledge of customer’s goals, tasks, interests, obstacles, patterns of work, work environments to the team<br />UX and UA (writers) both evaluate text content, labels, instructions, etc.<br />Goals -- Deliver highly consumable research findings to influence product team decisions and create effective products that win in the marketplace. <br />Research – <br />Express results as Patterns to influence multiple products / features<br />Express user behavior as Patterns for better understanding across use cases and usage scenarios.<br />
    • 24. My UX Work Practices – Deliver Results <br />Set expectations for everyone working with me.<br />What they can expect from me.<br />What I need from them to proceed.<br />Honor my commitments with whatever effort is needed<br />I’m known for putting in whatever hours are necessary to deliver good research in the time frame needed by the team.<br />Define and scope my tasks<br />I use project planning techniques to estimate tasks, assess resources, determine responsibilities, and define deliverables so the people who receive my work are satisfied. <br />Be thorough while respecting time and resource constraints <br />All work involves compromise with time, money and other resource constraints.<br />I want to make good tactical choices for the right UX methods to investigate each problem in the context of its time frame, depth of research needed to make a wise decision.<br />Be part of the team <br />Support other UX researchers in the company.<br />Integrate closely with product team members for specific products, and features.<br />Understand and support the company’s business objectives.<br />
    • 25. My UX Work Capabilities<br />Software development requires personal capabilities as well as technical knowledge and effective work practices. <br />Work Independently – <br />I’m confident and ask questions when I need to.<br />Successfully handle End to End Research responsibilities<br />Handle Ambiguity <br />Define problems; delineate alternatives; develop solutions<br />Manage Deadlines and Pressure<br />Use project management techniques to estimate and schedule work.<br />Prioritize work to meet deadlines and release pressure<br />Innovate methods to deliver results in minutes, hours or days, not months on a fixed cycle<br />Written Communication Skills<br />Authored many UX study reports and in-depth reports<br />Presentation Skills<br />Confident presenter; have taught university classes, presented to product teams, given brown bags, etc.<br />
    • 26. Strategic Thinking: What is the Product?<br />Listening to customer feedback, I discovered:<br />The “product” is not the software in a box.<br />The product is every aspect of the company’s service, support and technology at every customer touch point.<br />The Product is:<br />The software application<br />The installation process<br />The trouble shooting and help support<br />The “3rd” party drivers, plug-ins and compatible applications – “nobody cares that a 3rd party made the driver. The user sees the problem as being with Vista and the Microsoft brand.”<br />The advertising expectations set by our PR.<br />The experience of opening the box – bloody fingers<br />The competitor’s anti-product messages<br />The customer’s past experience with other products by our company.<br />Users perceive “the product” differently than product teams do. They don’t care how our company is organized, they only know that the software with our brand on the box isn’t working the way we promised. <br />“User Experience” is a lot more than what you can study in a lab session.<br />
    • 27. Information Architecture <br />Interaction Design Experiences <br />Interaction of:<br />The application with other applications<br />The task flows within the product<br />Users on pages to accomplish their goal on the page.<br />Users with data by well chosen controls<br />Experiences – full and collaborative responsibilities<br />14 + consulting experiences at Msft TWC<br />Single sign on; Win 8 IE Download, Healthcare, <br />Collaboration with PMs to build MsftLobi – Agile experience<br />Feature behavior design in Msft CRM<br />Cobalt Group – ID consults on Kia University, Parts Manager, Nitra Web Manager, etc.<br />Expedia – getting out of silos; intro dashboard concept<br />Worldspan – Architected the Dates and Destination site<br />Worldspan – Architected network utility<br />Captura – Architected version of Travel &amp; Expense Mgt web tool<br />Mapics – Product design for supply chain management module<br />Alltel Healthcare – Interaction design for Medical Ordering module +<br />GT Software – Architected Format Conversion Utility<br />
    • 28. Interaction Design: Trust Interactions between Consumers and Computers<br />If customers don’t trust our sites and applications they won’t use them to achieve their goals.<br />Pervasive problem across eCommerce, cloud computing, and all software tools:<br />Performed deep dive research into human trust / distrust behaviors<br />Developed in-depth understanding of user and consumer mental models<br />Introduced interaction patterns to trust design conversations<br />Interpreted precision trust definitions between humans to human, human to computer and computer to computer. Clarified this difficult concept to reduce conflict between different discipline teams.<br />Experiences – full and collaborative responsibilities<br />Interaction occurs within a Trust Space<br />Interaction involves emotional – rational calculations<br />Interaction is based on perceived intentions of the web site or other human party<br />Design requires a framework for discussion to ensure a solution that doesn’t have gaps once built<br />Interaction, design and UI patterns are a good way to grasp the flow of events<br />Design proceeds from both user research data and from proven principles<br />
    • 29. Interaction Design in Trust Space<br />TUX Context <br />Trust Environment<br />4/1/2010<br />13<br />Outline<br />Interaction Pattern<br />Truster: who may give trust<br />Trustee: who requests trust<br />I might lose…; I might gain<br />I might lose…; I might gain<br />Decision to Risk<br />Decision <br />to Offer<br />Trust Content<br />
    • 30. TUX Framework for Discussion <br />4/1/2010<br />14<br />Conversations, Concepts and Questions<br />
    • 31. TUX Framework: Haggle Interaction Pattern: Key Elements<br />4/1/2010<br />15<br />Truster<br />Trustee<br />Before<br />Probabilistic Basis of Trust: You appear to have an identity: seller to the tourist trade; recommended by travel bureau…<br />Vulnerability: You don’t know what things are worth: “Trust Me, I have something to offer. How about this?”<br />During<br />Basis for Exploitation: You appear to be a tourist: carrier of money to spend…<br />Truster’s Counter-offer: “That isn’t what I need. How much for this other one?”<br />Trustee’s offer: Exaggerated / False claim of value: “Priceless heirloom, from estate sale, I can let you have for fraction of its value…”<br />Trust Content : Trust Decision and Action: “Now that looks like real art. What a value; It’s on sale because today’s Discount Day!? Here ‘s my charge card. “<br />After<br />Haggle Trust Interaction Pattern<br />
    • 32. Designing Interaction from Principles <br />4/1/2010<br />Trust Defined for TUX<br />16<br />
    • 33. Dynamics – Sales / Marketing Personas<br /> <br />Interactions<br />Building Nicole and other Personas<br />Created new; revised old <br />Ensure data driven base<br />Data from customer site visits<br />Make the persona useful to the design / development effort. More than a picture on a wall.<br />Personas: Microsoft Business Solutions - http://mbspersonas/<br />Role play personas in reviews<br />Recruit personas for studies<br />Represent persona as virtual agent<br />
    • 34. Innovation and Flexibility in Research Tactics: More than five ways to inform your team.<br />NIST documents 35+ usability methods; too many groups throw every problem at lab research.. <br />We need to get more data from more customers in more realistic situations with deeper investigation. A lot of research is superficial; as much as we can get in two days with the client.<br />Opportunities to Explore: <br />Customer / Partner panels: long term, high and low engagement<br />Remote surveys and user research with prototypes<br />A/B testing of alternative designs on web sites / applications<br />Click through studies on web<br />Analysis of customer feedback from support contacts; send a smile, etc.<br />SQM<br />Usage tracking with Web Metrics <br />Engagement with customer communities<br />Contextual Inquiry in depth; don’t just talk to executives<br />Field usability studies in real work environments<br />Efforts <br />Cog Walk with real users<br />Observation of user task flow practices<br />Collect work demographics from participants<br />Draft OFS Sales Assistant persona<br />Flag informative participants for customer visits<br />CRM 2 choice one day study in my office<br />JHK – 2 machine study to maintain the contract<br />
    • 35. Driving User Centered Design: Turning Principles into Practice<br />A. Functionality Category<br />Does the tool have the critical attributes to do the job in some capacity? If it does not, it is the wrong tool for the job. If it has the critical attributes, then we can look at the extent to which it is well adapted, evolved, or designed for the job to be done. Critical attributes are the features or properties needed to do the job for which the tool was constructed.<br />1. Functional Effectiveness – Key Question: Does the tool have the critical properties to do the job? The most general effectiveness criteria that a tool should satisfy is that the tool has the critical properties to do the job regardless of how efficiently, effectively or how well it may be used by a user. If it does not, then it is not usable for the job at hand. This is a binary evaluation. You can’t smooth a rough cut piece of wood with a piece of tissue paper. You can with a piece of sandpaper. <br />A more specific effectiveness criterion asks: “Is this a good tool for the job? Does the tool have the critical attributes in the right form to function well in the manner for which it is to be used? This is the meaning of “effectiveness” for conventional usability. 400 grit sandpaper will not be as effective as `60 grit for smoothing the rough cut wood above. A handgun that shoots backwards would probably be considered as functionally ineffective, if “effectiveness” meant shooting something other than one’s self. It would be functionally effective if it was given to someone as a trap so that the receiver might shoot themselves. <br />It is important to be able to write and communicate clearly. A well chosen picture can complement explanatory text and attract readers attention. This is part of a guidance document to teach usability professionals to use new ideas when evaluating trust interactions that may not involve “ease of use.” <br />
    • 36. Challenging and Positive Work Experiences<br />MS CRM / Expedia <br />Having an impact<br />Issue: What are the strengths and weaknesses of CRM and its competitors: Sales Logix, Salesforce.com, Act, and Goldmine.<br />Looking for points of attack / defense; where should we put our money? What features don’t we have to improve?<br />Getting rid of silos and keeping dashboards visible<br />Heuristic Evaluation Checklist<br /><ul><li>Most tools don’t give actionable results
    • 37. Most tools are too global: Resolution too gross
    • 38. Solution: research HCI literature. Devise a finer grained tool.</li></li></ul><li>Heuristic Evaluation Checklist: Categories<br /><ul><li>Information Organization
    • 39. Interface Behavior
    • 40. Task Congruent UI
    • 41. Graphical Presentation
    • 42. Easy Navigation
    • 43. Uses Persona’s language
    • 44. User in Control
    • 45. Consistency, Standards, Correctness
    • 46. Error Prevention, Protection and Control
    • 47. Recognition rather than Recall
    • 48. Flexibility and Ease of Use
    • 49. Aesthetic and Minimalist Design
    • 50. Help and Documentation
    • 51. Service (to user) Orientation</li></li></ul><li>Heuristic Evaluation Checklist: sample<br />
    • 52. Challenging and Positive Work Experiences<br />MS CRM – <br />Two day, Two choice study<br />Close collaboration with PM to plan most informative research; <br />Building sales and marketing personas;<br />Building the sales process model from site visit data<br />The Cobalt Group –<br />Parts Manager – Vin vs. Stock number<br />Introduced usability process and modified UML to the company<br />Won hearts and minds of Account Execs, Project Managers, 20+ Designers and Leads: <br />KIA University, Nitra web site manager, Parts Manager, Leads Manager<br />
    • 53. Four Research Challenges:Taking Visio to the Office Ribbon UI<br />Evolving a Superlative User Experience<br />As a contributing member of the product team, my approach is to plan, coordinate and run studies that drive all teams to produce an effective product for the marketplace. Not to just run isolated usability studies.<br />These coordinated studied lead up to the Visio: Create a Basic Connected Diagram study which resolved issues around a major set of new features.<br />Challenges<br />Fighting for our product’s version of the ribbon<br />Impacting Design – How smart should we be?<br />Contextual Tab is not Discoverable<br />Discovering the “Quality without a Name.” Work within the Drawing Pattern<br />
    • 54. Taking Visio to the Fluent UI:<br />Evolving a Good Design through iterated, co-related studies<br />Command Card Sort<br />Insert or Delete Connectors 1 &amp; 2<br />Shapes in Window vs. Shapes in Ribbon 1 &amp; 2<br />Infinite Page Study<br />Shapes Layout<br />Build a Connected Diagram Study<br />
    • 55. Challenge 1: The Ribbon: Fight or give in?<br />Ribbon Guidelines want the Visio shapes to come from the ribbon. Visio has always had a Shapes Window.<br />Shapes in Window vs. Shapes in Ribbon I and II – <br />Should we move some or all of the Shapes Window to the Ribbon – <br />“No. Keep Shapes Pane on left. “ -- This Justified a break with Office UX standard for the product. <br />Is Quick Shapes useful? – “Yes. It keeps me from going to 5 stencils to get 6 shapes.”<br />Is that important? “Yes, I have to work fast and need to have all my shapes for my diagram type at hand.”<br />
    • 56. Shapes in Window or Ribbon: User Expectations Rule all <br />For all of Visio’s history Shapes have been accessed from the Shapes Window. Should we Change or Fight?<br />Strong user reaction. Keep everything out of our drawings. Keep us in context. Don’t cover our work. Let us work fast.<br />
    • 57. Challenge 2: Driving Design: How Smart should we be?<br />Visio is evolving beyond “Shapes on a page.” <br />Issue: How smart should our feature be? Users are wary of too much assistance (clippy, task panes, auto-format for lists…)<br />Delete Connectors I and II studies –<br />What rules should govern Smart Insert and Delete? – <br />Make room for user action, but “don’t re-arrange diagrams for user. “ <br />Provide limited auto align and space. <br />Users are wary of us “fixing” and don’t “Make more work for me. “<br />Repair some breaks, leave others alone.<br />
    • 58. Insert / Delete Shapes and Connectors II: Issues<br />1<br />2<br />3<br />What rules should Visio use when deleting connectors attached to deleted shapes? For:<br />Terminator shapes: Starting or Ending<br />Decision shapes<br />Multiply connected shapes<br />
    • 59. Interaction Design, User Task Patterns and Success of Insert / Delete <br />Smart Insert Shape<br />Issue: Task observation of users shows several patterns of work.<br />Problem: Some patterns of work lead to users not engaging the features.<br />Some features don’t have an initial UI element to grab. They appear contextually.<br />Smart Delete<br />
    • 60. Fix the Smart Insert and Delete?<br /> Smart Insert – drag and drop shapes into an existing diagram<br />The hit zone was a bit tricky.<br />How it works. <br />Drag a shape where you want it to be between other shapes. Drop the shape when it is positioned where you want it.<br />“It’s a bit tricky to get the alignment right, but when you hit it, it’s obvious.”<br />Problem: Intrinsic Undiscoverability<br />Problem: Nothing tells you that this behavior exists. You don’t start by choosing an action. Current user task flows prevent them from engaging the feature. <br />First they cut the connection<br />Then they move each shape and its linked shapes apart to make room<br />Then they grab the new shape and drop it between the two<br />Then reconnect the connectors.<br />Users won’t discover the feature except by accident. Design is not an solution option. <br />
    • 61. Challenge 3: Across Office: The Contextual Tab is not Discoverable<br />In Visio research, participants consistently had trouble being aware of the contextual tab being displayed. <br />This was described as: “Still being a problem as of 2004” in a Office Ribbon doc.<br />Independent Personal research and literature review shows problem was intrinsic to human visual perception.<br />Tab appears in peripheral vision which is not sensitive to color, fine lines, fast change. <br />Design team was exploring changes that would not work: color, brighter…<br />Based on my knowledge of human perception, made several recommendations now being considered.<br />
    • 62. Why is the Contextual Tab hard to Discover: Receptor Distribution<br />Approximate location of contextual tab when viewing a text / shapes in center of document window. Tab is in outside of color vision receptors and may be in the “blind” spot depending on the user’s point of fixation..<br />
    • 63. We can’t resolve the tab’s fine detail<br />Figure 08-12 B Resolution in the peripheral retina.<br />Resolution is high only at the fovea and it decreases in the peripheral retina. In addition,<br />Color vision is best in the fovea and limited in the peripheral retina because of the lack of cones. <br />A representation of what the retina sees is shown in Figure08-13A.<br />
    • 64. Recommendations<br />Design efforts should take into account the characteristics of the human visual system.<br />Visual Cue <br />A visual cue needs to connect the contextual object with the contextual tab. <br />Animated movement from the contextual object to the contextual tab<br />Would visually relate the two. This could be a moving colored tab emerging from the object.<br />Slow Flash or Intensity Change<br />The tab itself may need different highlighting, such as a short period of low frequency flashing.<br />Bigger is Better<br />The graphical design of the contextual tab may need to utilize large visual areas rather than thin edges typical of graphical UI elements.<br />
    • 65. Challenge 4: Communicating Findings with Patterns<br />Recalled user practices discovered in earlier studies <br />Customizing their own stencils<br />Typically using 4-6 shapes per drawing type<br />Task flow patterns – <br />L to R; one at a time<br />Build by modules; <br />Polish one, then duplicate, position and rename<br />Adapted study questions to elicit reactions to related features <br />Quick shapes and the mini-shapes bar<br />Auto-connect and your task flow (a change is coming)<br />Assessed user reaction to a new task flow:<br />Auto-connect, <br />The mini-shapes bar, <br />Quick shapes and drag-out connections<br />Identified a UI pattern: <br />Working within the Drawing – key principle of the Fluent UI <br />
    • 66. Drive Design Across Features with User Interaction Patterns: <br />Work within the Drawing Pattern (draft)<br /> Use When: <br />A user is creating or editing a connected diagram such as a flow chart with a drawing program. The program lets them place prebuilt graphical shapes onto a drawing canvas from a shape library containing multiple sets of shape stencils, and to access commands from a menu/toolbar area which contains commands organized into groups.<br />Problem: <br />Locating shapes in the UI off of the drawing page forces users to repeatedly move their mouse / cursor through long screen distances to find, select and use the shapes.  <br />Commands are also located off of the drawing canvas in menus, toolbars or graphical displays such as the Fluent UI or “ribbon” interface. <br /> Consequences: <br />Large repetitive movements with the whole arm are required with this design to move the cursor to the extreme edges of the screen. Movement within the document page requires smaller less fatiguing movements with the wrist and fingers .<br />Considerable time is spent moving the mouse cursor to the shape library area to get a shape, and then back to the drawing to position the shape on the drawing. <br />Considerable time is spent finding the right command or shape, which may not be on the currently exposed stencil.<br />Users have more work because there is no single area for frequently used commands.<br />
    • 67. UI Pattern: Work within Drawing<br />Solution: <br />Define in-drawing interaction mechanisms that enable users to access and apply content (shapes, tools and commands) how and where it is needed, without having to leave the drawing surface. <br />Using the 80:20 principle, design product features so that users can accomplish most of the work on their most frequent kinds of drawings with contextual tools that display at the point of work within the drawing. <br />Key elements of the pattern <br />The behavior of a UI element (ex: a cursor or a connector or shape) changes as a result of its context.<br />Changes in behavior happen at the point of work in the drawing (as opposed to the process of leaving the drawing, going to a UI container for shapes or commands, choosing one and then bringing it back to the drawing to apply it.)<br />Frequent or preferred user choices are conserved and displayed, or are available, at the point of work for use.<br />Opportunities for interaction by UI elements change as a result of their context, ex: proximity of one element to another.<br />
    • 68. A Company-wide Issue: Orphan Bugs and our Customers’ Satisfaction<br />A research report for ODG: 3rd Party Data on Customer Satisfaction with Office 2007<br />Office 2007 NSAT is down in some categories<br />Customer perception of Microsoft favorability is declining. <br />NSAT drivers show customers have issues with our quality, security, caring, communication and reliability. <br />PSS calls show support call issues often are over Starving and Orphaned bugs<br />Starved – punted to next milestone, release…<br />Orphaned – low sev, low pain, pri3; will never get fixed: bad behavior, problems deep in code, cross features and products.<br />
    • 69. A Company-wide Issue: Orphan Bugs and our Customers’ Satisfaction<br />Consequences<br />Affects customer willingness to buy; delay purchase. <br />Affects other MS products<br />Degrades Brand<br />Set of solutions for PMs are needed.<br />PMs will tend to be more attracted to marketable new features than better behaving features<br />We can’t sell on basis of: “This release is less bad that the previous one.”<br />What should we do when our normal life cycle isn’t working? <br />Answer: think outside the release cycle.<br />
    • 70. Using Usability Lab Equipment<br />Scoped, purchased and set up usability lab for Cobalt Group.<br />Scoped and advised U/W – Bothell on portable usability lab equipment purchase<br />Trained as technical resource for MSFT – Office Design Group’s OVO lab equipment.<br />Constructed and delivered training to all ODG UX researchers on the OVO equipment.<br />Assisted other researchers with lab problems.<br />Learned Morae lab management system.<br />
    • 71. Questions?<br />

    ×