Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

bbk_process_design

110 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

bbk_process_design

  1. 1. VALIDATION ACTIVITIES - 18/07
  2. 2. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 2 Process Process - Where we are, what are the next steps Idea Generation Opportunity Assessment Discovery Build Measure Lea rn Design & Develop Learn & Review Learn & Analyze GrowLaunch Refine & mature Pivot Apply learnings Withdraw service In identifying overall failings in the Clubcard TV service, we also identified areas of success. Children's content disproportionately out performing all other categories served as the catalyst for pivoting the service in that direction. ! This pivot formed the first step in moving towards a dedicated children's service. Combining ongoing learnings from the live service with dedicated research though prototyping, user testing and third party studies, we looked to thoroughly validate the market opportunity for blinkbox kids. !
  3. 3. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 3 Pretotyping Prototyping User testing User testing WPW Study 07/04 29/04 03/2014 04/2014 19/05 21/05 17/04 19-20/05 25/03 22/04 We drove approximately 10,000 visits to three duplicate web pages to gauge potential interest in a blinkbox kids subscription service. In addition to pre-registration (which generated 700+ responses), we listed other potential features to record interest. Of these download generated by far the most interest. We produced a high fidelity Android tablet prototype and distributed to 20+ trial families, with half the respondents given a bigger & better content selection. We then monitored their use of the app during the trial period though Google Analytics, comparing this to diary entries and a more involved questionnaire for parents at the close of the trial. We commissioned the specialist research agency What People Want to undertake an in depth Ethnographic study into children’s natural behaviour using VOD services. This focused in on 8 families and included a diary study, home visits and interviews and and detailed debrief session where learnings could be digested and interpreted. To ratify our conclusions we commissioned 3 days of consultancy from child's digital media specialist agency Dubit. Providing them access to our research materials, business modelling and proposed roadmap, we sought professional guidance on overall proposition, market opportunity and overall strategy. We produced a throw away prototype to get snap shot of how parents value and use parental controls on devices We iterated our existing Android prototype to get an exhaustive overview of how parents value and use parental controls in general. Defining the new product - Validation activities Based on some pre-conceptions, existing learnings from Clubcard TV, ideation sessions and market research we put together a number of hypotheses we needed to validate or disprove in order to define criteria for a minimum viable product.
  4. 4. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 4 Minimum viable product "The minimum viable product is that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort." Android only - Tablet & handset Subscription service aimed at children from 3 to 7 Download function for offline use Parental controls - Content block & PIN code Chromecast support Capability to incorporate promotional content Recommended features for a first launch blinkbox kids MVP : New product defined The results from all these activities allowed us to strip down the product to the features that proved to resonate best with users throughout testing. We look to provide a strong foundation, whilst delivering an experience that customers can love.
  5. 5. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 5 Why Android only Feature prioritisation - learnings applied Speed Refining the product based on real world learnings is much quicker on Android without the encumbrance of a signing process. This allows quick iteration in order to stabilise and improve the app. ! Foundation The existing app developed for the prototype trial process provides a good foundation on which to complete the development for the first launch app. ! hudl Leveraging hudl facilitates quick growth through pre-install, on device marketing (e.g. Widgets) and blinkbox/Tesco specific incentivisation. !
  6. 6. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 6 Subscription service aimed at children 3 to 7 Feature prioritisation - learnings applied Trial learnings Both usage data and parent feedback showed that children under 3 were the least engaged with video content. Whilst device use was high, short attention spans mean that younger children gravitate towards simple games. ! Content learnings Younger children are well catered for by BBC, have a stronger affinity to BBC brands/characters than children of other ages, and are more prevalent to repeat watch. ! Age divisive UX Designing an appropriate experience for children under 3, can result in creating an age divisive interface, diminishing brand perception with older children. ! Perception Marketing a tablet based video service to children under 3 could have negative PR connotations. This sentiment was backed up by consultancy recommendations.
  7. 7. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 7 Download function for offline use Feature prioritisation - learnings applied Learnings All our research activities gave some focus to downloading content, and all suggested that there is an unmet need and desire for offline viewing. Pre-journey prioritisation, organisation and poor experience was the chief reasons for parents not utilising this feature where offered on the existing services they used. ! Expectation We found that in the Prototype app, there was an expectation that download would and should be a default feature. ! Conclusions A download function must be included in a launch product, but we should look to refine the feature beyond its basic function as seen in other services in order to influence behaviour and differentiate. This could include download prompts from the notification panel as well more automated reminders and function.
  8. 8. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 8 Parental controls - Content block & PIN code Feature prioritisation - learnings applied Learnings Whilst all parents responded positively to the inclusion of parental controls, in practice parents rarely use the controls that are available on the devices they already own, instead relying on judgement and supervision. ! Conclusions We recommend that some level of parental control is included in app, as this shows positive intent to would be subscribers and provides marketable features. ! Manual content blocking is the most effective and practical control. The feature was often requested in parental feedback, and making this manual rather than automating age filtering shows the full content selection in a more positive light.
  9. 9. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION How and when we propose building it 9 Considerations for roadmap Backend & Business Prototyping Research All other platforms Note: Unknown dependancies must be identified, and known dependancies addressed before development timelines can be meaningfully defined. Note: Launching on Android first as a stand alone app offers flexibility for quick learning, iteration & refinement (no app signing process). It also builds on foundation of prototype & can utilise hudl leverage for quick growth. Note: Whilst there is sound business logic in launching kids as a stand alone service on Android, support, maintenance and messaging make this approach inadvisable for other platforms. Requirement gathering Specifications cont... Integration Clientside dev Single Sign In (SSO) Group digital wallet Re-factor Recurring SubscriptionRecruitment August 2014 - September 2015 March 2014 - August 2014 TBC 2014 - September 2015 2015 - 2016 User testing Monitor & learn Specify for all platforms Marketing & branding prep Merge Kids service with Movies across platforms www.blinkbox.com
  10. 10. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Starting the process 10 Stage 1: Ideation A working group formed to translate perceived customer values into product features by sketching them out on paper
  11. 11. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION 11 That there is sufficient market demand for a blinkbox branded service aimed at 0-9 year olds Existing video on demand services are changing viewing behaviours and creating market appetite for dedicated kids VOD services That user experience can be a meaningful differentiator for a children's video on demand service That there is an unmet need for children being able to view video content offline on mobile devices That parents feel a video only service justifies a premium subscription That parents perception of value is based on quality, familiarity and popularity of content That children will regularly use an SVOD service on a tablet device. That a one size fits all experience/interface can meet the usability need for 0-9 year olds. That parents are looking to automate how they can control the viewing behaviours of their children on devices That well presented parental controls can engender greater trust in, and/or attraction to a service That children and parent s are looking to customise their experience to accommodate multiple users From the ideation, and CTV learnings we generated numerous hypotheses needing validation Translating expectation
  12. 12. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Early validation - Measuring potential demand 12 Stage 2: Pretotype/Smoke test - The experiment Pretotyping is a way to test an idea quickly and inexpensively by creating extremely simplified, mocked or virtual versions of that product to help validate the premise that "If we build it, they will use it." ! To prototype kids we produced a false campaign consisting of three duplicate web pages encouraging genuine potential customers to pre-register for the service in order to gauge and quantify interest. ! Using both a Google CPA campaign and a banner ad on tesco.com, we drove approximately 10,000 visits to these pages, recording not only potential commitment to the service, but also interest in other related features, e.g. download. £2.99 £3.99 Free
  13. 13. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Early validation - Learnings 13 Stage 2: Pretotype/Smoke test - The results We ran two rounds of the Pretotype testing between 25/03 & 22/04. Image assets for content titles were banded in round 1, & identical in round 2, affording us a clearer picture of price sensitivity. ! • Pages showing paid subscription generated a conversion rate of - 4.5% - 318 Pre-reg, 7109 Unique visits • We recorded interest in additional features, of these download/offline viewing generated the most interest - (over 25%) • Price sensitivity amongst respondents pre-registering for paid subscription was negligible - 4.87% @ £2.99 & 4.13% @ £3.99 The key conclusions ! • The conversion rate was inline with expectations set by other services. Proof of positive potential. • If/when the service were to be offered, we defined it could a higher price point could be set for those subscribing through app stores (iTunes, Google Play). This offsets the 30% rev share surrendered, and highlights the value offered to Tesco/blinkbox customers through our own billing channels.
  14. 14. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Early validation - Learnings 14 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Preto round 2: 16 - 22 April Preto round 1: 25 March - 9 April A) £2.99 B) £3.99 A) £2.99 B) £3.99 kids tv 2351 Uniques 109 Registrations 1129 Uniques 55 Registrations 1112 Uniques 46 Registrations 2517 Uniques 108 Registrations eBooks - 187 No ads - 141 Parental control - 88 Educational games - 210 Audiobooks - 220 Download 319 Stage 2: Pretotype/Smoke test - The results
  15. 15. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Criteria for qualitative learning 15 Stage 2: The first trial As we planned to trial the service with children as young as 3, decided early on we needed a credible and robust prototype. ! To create this quickly we forked an existing version of the Clubcard TV (CTV) app, adding a bespoke user experience that we felt would resonate with children between the ages of 2 & 9. ! Once complete we pre-installed the app on 20 hudl tablets and circulated them to trial families recruited from within the business. Trialists were left with the app for 3 weeks (07/04 - 29/04), we collected data in 3 ways: ! 1. Google Analytics - All events tracked in app against individual users 2. Dairy extracts - We asked parents to diarise their childs use of the app where possible 3. Questionare - We questioned parents on the appeal of the app, their childs use & impressions & general habits around VOD Create user stories Sketch Wireframe Design Develop
  16. 16. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Qualitative data - learnings 16 Stage 2: The first trial Whilst overall feedback about the app was generally good, content become the key element that dictated feedback, reaction and usage of the app during the trial. ! As part of the trial we had run a A/B test, giving half the trialists access to a better content collection. We were careful to categorise feedback: ! Content/Proposition Users with A content had 31% more titles & 41% more hours available ! • They generated 86% more sessions • They spent 278% more time watching • Most trialists grew tired of the content within a week
 Product/Experience ! • Lack of episodic imagery confused trialists - didn't understand death of content • The method used for navigating within the video players timeline (scrubbing) - confused children • The method used for navigating back to the series strip via the pause button - confused children
  17. 17. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Further qualitative learning 17 Stage 3: In depth user testing We conducted a number of One-to-One user testing sessions with trialist parents that took part in the first trial. ! We were specifically looking to gauge their needs and expectations for parental control features, and observe their understanding and reaction to our proposed implementation of the feature set. ! To do this we iterated upon the existing prototype by embedding static images to illustrate our proposed implementation of parental control features. Part of test included showing different users different versions of the screen (A/B). A) With all controls in dials B) With time controls in a more standard Android format
  18. 18. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Further qualitative learning - Conclusions 18 Stage 3: In depth user testing Failed validation Failed validation Failed validation Failed validation Deferred Passed validation Passed validation Parents take parental control very seriously, and would respond well to their inclusion within the service. However since evidence shows that few parents actually utilise similar controls on the devices they own, we felt that the best policy would be to offer minimal but meaningful control over content, rather than more expansive controls. Aiming to engender trust with users, as well as simplify the technical delivery effort we advise function be limited to manual content blocking only, controlled within a PIN protected parental control area. Feature Status Rationale Time allocation Bedtime mode Viewing behaviour review Age specific content filtering User profiles Manual content blocking PIN code System controls needed to make feature credible System controls needed to make feature credible Could create negative impression - too much or too little negative Narrow age band selection could create impression of limited content Difficult to implement, needed in future to carry service to other platforms Minimum feature for launch, allows parents to control content Minimum feature for launch
  19. 19. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Learning applied - re-design 19 Stage 4: Ongoing tests Based on the results of trials and testing, we are looking to iterate on the feedback and learning garnered. Delivering a new version of the prototype app for the next round of testing, focusing on: ! • Real content proposition - actual titles proposed for release • Scaleability & content navigation - Introducing simple categorisation & promotion opportunities • Device portability - Looking to build a single app that elegantly scales across handset and tablet • Branding - Introducing the new blinkbox brand into the app • Android stipulations - ensuring we adhere to guidelines to gain app store promotional placement
  20. 20. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Learning applied - re-design 20 Existing model - ribbon We looked to introduce content hierarchy by introducing a scrollable tab component. We were careful to ensure that we applied learnings from the the trial process, and so proposed that the default tab encapsulates all content to allow for a purely picture led navigation for children too young to read. ! The tabs allow facilitate quick iteration for sponsorship and editorial promotion. revised model - scrollable tabs
  21. 21. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Learning applied - re-design 21 Content catalogue - Ribbon 1. The catalogue Content catalogue - Scrollable tabs
  22. 22. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Learning applied - re-design 22 Series strip - Sliding info panel 2. The series strip User feedback had indicated that triggers to download, add content to favourites and block were too hidden. We looked to surface these actions and looked at presenting episodes in contained cards that scale better for portrait mode and handset usage. ! the download is brought to the fore by adding the trigger in a floating action button. Series strip - Card format
  23. 23. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Learning applied - re-design 23 Player - Scrubber on position shade 3. Player Feedback indicated that the position shade resonated well with users, but that the scrubber handle caused confusion. We reverted to a more standard scrub bar/slider, but continue to embrace the innovation of the shade progress paradigm. ! Previously pressing pause would transition the user back to the series strip. Some users found this jarring, so again we reverted to a more standard pattern to remedy this. Player - Logarithmic shade
  24. 24. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Universal app - handset support 24 With no legacy apps live, our recommendation is to build a single app that will scale across all devices. This reduces overheads on support, marketing requirements, iteration and release. This is Googles recommended approach. ! We took care to follow Android guidelines to ensure scaling between devices requires as little development effort as possible.
  25. 25. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Universal app - Android TV 25 Whilst proliferation and future popularity of Android TV is unknown (Announced at Google I/O 25/06), we produced a quick series of mocks to illustrate how simply the brand experience and proposed hierarchy can scale to TV. ! Developing for Android TV could add as little as 2 weeks to delivery of the project, but could well guarantee store promotional status with Google.
  26. 26. BLINKBOX KIDS | VALIDATION Universal app - Android TV 26
  27. 27. THANK YOU!

×