ICIC meeting Stuttgart Ensad Field Investigation Report


Published on

Published in: Travel, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ICIC meeting Stuttgart Ensad Field Investigation Report

  1. 1. Stuttgart meeting 24-25 November 2011 HDM Enhancing interconnectivity of short and long distance transport networks through passenger focused interlinked information-connectivity Project 266250. Coordinator: IIID, Peter Simlinger “ In-situ” field investigations Anna Bernagozzi David Serrault Christophe Tallec
  2. 2. An holistic approach of a multimodal hub complexity ? Context
  3. 3. Field investigation Journey mapping: Generate empathy through descriptions of real travel situations.
  4. 4. Traveler journeys mapping template Field investigation
  5. 5. A Field study methodology ? Proposed field studies methodology based on Nielsen “quietly observing” approach.
  6. 6. Methodology <ul><li>Identify a limited number of critical touch points where the multimodal information is provided. </li></ul><ul><li>For each touch point, indentify an unique observation point where users can be quietly observed. </li></ul><ul><li>Identify the main task related to this touch point and note: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A brief description of the task </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A brief description of the interface provided. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Each time an user passing through this touch point and use obviously the information provided note: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The user profile based on the user segmentation provided. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The approximate time spent (quickly, average, long) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rate the task success (Successful, Average, Failed) </li></ul></ul>Step 1: Identify, watch, and listen
  7. 7. Methodology Step 2: Insights collection and analysis <ul><li>Tabulate collected data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Touch point observed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Description of the touch point </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of users observed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User profile </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time spend </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Success </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improvement ideas proposed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data computation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>average success of each touch point, for all touch points </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>average time spend by touch point, for all touch points </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Percentage of users profiles observed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most commonly proposed improvement ideas. </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Field investigation questions. Stumbles on Stakeholders collaboration <ul><li>Even airports public areas are private spaces. </li></ul><ul><li>Airports security rules are strict because of the terrorist hazard. </li></ul><ul><li>Stakeholders Ego. An unexpected issue. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Global design methodology The design brief The 'double diamond' design process model , Design Council, 2005 Insights and goals to be summarized in a design brief.
  10. 10. Ground for the ICIC design phase <ul><li>Among all the information collected during previous work packages, we will focus on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Context </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Primary drivers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Primary risks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conditions, strategy, UX framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Requirements, DNA, design principles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Out of scope </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Deliverables, output expected </li></ul></ul>Creating the perfect design brief , Peter L. Phillips, Allworth Press, 2004