1. Human-centered
Design for App
Development
Mitchel Böhi
A tool for app
creators to integrate
a human-centered
design approach in
the development of
mobile applications
Bachelor Thesis
May 2015

2. Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, School of Art and Design
BA Design Management, International
Bachelor Thesis
A tool for app creators to integrate a human-centered design
approach in the development of mobile applications
Human-centered Design
for App Development
Author Mitchel Böhi
206 Calle Conchita
San Clemente, CA 92672
+ 1 949 370 4709 / +41 76 323 3630
mitch.boehi@gmail.com
Main Tutor Hans Kaspar Hugentobler, Tutor and Faculty Member,
Design Management, International
Major Bachelor of Arts in Product and Industrial Design with
the Specialization in Design Management
Location, Date Lucerne, May 21, 2015

3. Abstract
I
This thesis combines human-centered design (HCD) with app development. It attempts to
uncovered the benefits of HCD for app developers and app creators alike. The initial observa-
tion of the current app market led to the questioning of whether user’s needs and behaviours
are taken into consideration when developing mobile applications, and if not, how could
integrating a human-centered design approach enhance the development process of future
mobile applications (apps). Subsequently the research question is thus formulated as follows:
How may integrating a human-centered design approach enhance the development of mo-
bile applications?
Accordingly, the first section of this documentation reviewed the app market that current-
ly exists, and dives deep into uncovering the reasons for why apps fail. Moving forward
through research, it surfaces if the problem needs an app, user-interfaces; which is the com-
bination of design, functionality, and intuitiveness, and wrapping up with market growth.
Statistics, facts, and figures explicity state, and in some cases predict, that there has, or will
continue to be a rapid growth in the future of mobile apps. After understanding the market
the reader is guided into the section of technology, which includes platforms, disruption of
industries, human-centered computing, and analytics. Combined together, the market and
technology are summed up in order to move on in researching mobile application develop-
ment. In this section it defines and explains the broad spectrum of apps, narrowing in on the
current processes, all of which do not include the human, and what it takes to create an app.
Lastly, but not least, the research phase places great importance on human-centered design,
where it began, how it can benefit, and finally the importance of what HCD has to offer. Con-
sequently, looking into user-centered system design, as well as human-computer interaction
guided the author to the revealing of a case study, where HCD has been used in app devel-
opment. Through this study many important aspects and facets arose, but incorporating an
actual process for HCD in development still remains unseen.
Conducting interviews, and spending a day in the life of a developers world assisted in an-
swering the hypothesis: Integrating human-centered design during app development surfac-
es user needs and desires, which in turn minimizes app failure in the market. The ideation
phase concludes the creation of three concepts that have been measured, which resulted in
two prototypes that were tested with real developers. From this testing and integration of
findings and insights the final solution was created, tested, and re-developed. Most impor-
tantly, the benefits of this thesis are that applying a human-centered design approach in de-
veloping mobile apps shows an equal gain for the developer and the actual user. A tool that
enhances the way in which app developers create mobile applications, while at the same time
minimizes the chance of failure once launched into the app market.

4. Table of Contents
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Abbreviations
1. Introduction
1.1 Topic Definition
1.2 Motivation and Research Question
1.3 Problem Definition and Hypothesis
1.4 Research Goal
1.5 Guiding the Reader
DISCOVER
2. The Market
2.1 Why Apps Fail
2.1.1 Does the Problem Need an App?
2.1.2 User-interface: Design, Functionality, and Intuitiveness
2.1.3 Market Growth
2.2 Technology
2.2.1 Platform Technology
2.2.2 Disruption of Industries by Disintermediation
2.2.3 Human-centered Computing
2.2.4 Analytics
2.2.5 Sum Up
3. Mobile Application Development
3.1 Definition
3.2 What is an App?
3.2.1 Developing Apps
3.2.2 Tools for Development
3.2.3 Guidelines and Restrictions
3.3 The Process
3.4 Creating an App
3.4.1 Application Developer
3.4.2 Different Approaches: Native, Web, and Hybrid
3.4.3 Costs: Realized and Unforeseen
3.5 What is being created?
3.5.1 The right questions at the right time
3.6 Why is it being created?
I
II
V
VII
VIII
1
1
1
2
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
II

5. 3.6.1 Product or Service
3.7 Whom is it being created for?
3.7.1 The Target Market
3.8 How will it work?
3.8.1 Process Organization
3.8.2 Planning for Error
3.8.3 ROI: Free or Paid
3.8.4 Sum Up
4. Human-centered Design
4.1 Definition
4.1.1 Tracing HCD in Development
4.2 Phases of HCD
4.2.1 Inspiration, Ideation, Implementation
4.2.2 The Lenses of HCD
4.3 Importance of HCD
4.4 User-centered System Design
4.4.1 Definition
4.4.2 User Experience
4.4.3 User Needs and Behaviors
4.5 Human-computer Interaction
4.5.1 Understand to be Understood
4.5.2 Human-Machine Reconfiguration
4.5.3 Interaction Design
4.6 A Case Study of HCD in App Development
5. Conclusion
DEFINE
6. Findings and Insights
7. Criteria
7.1 Defining Criteria
7.2 Measurements for Criteria
8. Research Plan
8.1 Interviews with Professionals (Developers)
8.2 A Day in the Life
DEVELOP
9. Ideation
9.1 Process Combination
9.2 Creating Concepts
9.3 Concept 1 - The App
9.4 Concept 2 - The Website
9.5 Concept 3 - The Digital Book
9.6 Measure Concepts and Create Prototypes
12
12
12
13
13
13
13
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
18
18
18
18
19
19
19
19
20
20
22
22
24
24
25
26
26
27
28
28
28
29
30
31
32
33
III

6. 10. Prototype Testing
10.1 Feedback and Insights
11. Managing the Design
11.1 Combine to Create
11.2 Testing Prototype: App Developers and App Users
11.3 Review and Improvement
DELIVER
12. Final Solution
12.1 Final Testing
12.2 Final Solution
13. Conclusion
13.1 Design Management
13.2 Limitation of Study and Further Research
14. Bibliography
Acknowledgements
Declaration of Authorship
Appendix
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
41
42
43
43
44
45
51
52
53
IV

7. Figure 1
Thesis Approach in Three Lenses
Figure 2
Double Diamond Guiding the Process
Figure 3
Intuitive User Interface Versus Excellent Functionality
Figure 4
Five Development Processes Combined
Figure 5
The Answer is Increasingly Free
Figure 6
The Three Lenses of HCD
Figure 7
The Human-centered Design Process
Figure 8
System for Measuring Criteria
Figure 9
A Day in the Life of a Developer
Figure 10
The Working Process for Ideation
Figure 11
The App
Figure 12
The Website
Figure 13
The Digital Book
1
3
5
10
14
16
17
25
27
28
30
31
32
List of Figures
V
1 of 2

8. Figure 14
Prototype One (P1)
Figure 15
Prototype Two (P2)
Figure 16
Flat vs Skeuomorphism
Figure 17
Prototype Testing at 1up GmbH
Figure 18
Spider Diagram for Prototype Testing
Figure 19
The Stages of Development
Figure 20
Prototype Testing: Insights to Final Prototyping
Figure 21
Prototype Testing: Finite Details with David Greminger
Figure 22
The Final Solution Before Testing 1
Figure 23
The Final Solution Before Testing 2
Figure 24
The Final Solution Before Testing 3
Figure 25
The Final Solution Before Testing 4
Figure 26
Final Solution Testing
35
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
39
40
40
40
41
List of Figures
VI
2 of 2

9. Table 1
From Findings to Criteria
Table 2
Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Criteria
Table 3
Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 1
Table 4
Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 2
Table 5
Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 3
List of Tables
VII
23
25
33
33
34

10. APP (S)
Abbreviation for applications, which work on a mobile device
APS
Application Process Management
ASAP
As soon as possible
ASO
App Store Optimization
D7
Domain7 (Vancouver based firm)
HCC
Human-centered Computing
HCD
Human-centered Design
HTTP
Hypertext Transfer Protocol
iOS
Apples operating system amongst all digital platforms
IxD
Interaction Design
MVP
Minimum Viable Product
P1
Prototype 1
P2
Prototype 2
PLA
Program License Agreement
SDK
Software Development Kit
SMS
Short Messaging Service
UCS
User-centered System Design
UI
User-Interface
UX
User-Experience
List of Abbreviations
VIII

11. 1. Introduction
1.1 Topic Definition
This thesis seeks to explore the development of mobile applications (apps) and why most
fail once reaching the market (Pramis, 2013). The research will focus on app development
in order to externalize the problems and issues within the phases of the current development
processes. This exploration includes the creation process of app development, why apps
fail, and how developing applications with a human-centered design (HCD) approach may
be able to enhance the user-experience. In the end, the overarching goal is to provide a
tool that assists app creators through the development process of creating an app.
Currently, there are a variety of methods
for creating apps on Apple (iOS), Android,
Windows, and Blackberry devices, but there
are no tools at this time, which guide the
creator in a way of placing the user at the center
of design. Although there are numerous tools
for specific types of applications and how they
may be developed there is no general tool that
assists with HCD for mobile applications. To
discuss this topic in depth it requires exploring
HCD and the theories that have been proven
within the process. The connections, as seen
on the right, between App Development, The
App Market, and Human-centered Design will
be analyzed in-depth to make connections, and
further provide a tool for existing and future
app creators. This tool aims to guide and assist
in the development process of future mobile applications, while minimize the chance of failure.
How a product or service appears is important, but as Steve Jobs stated, “Design is not
just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works“ (Cornett, 2010). Ideating and
producing a great app concept to target a specific market is merely a small piece of what it
takes to get it right. Being near to certain about how the app will perform before it reaches
the market is far more imperative. Furthermore, the goal is to discover exactly how using a
human-centered design approach may benefit app creators in bringing more user-
centered applications to the market. “We can’t build products that “come to the user” if we’re
unwilling to come to the user ourselves” (Lowdermilk, 2013). According to this statement, the
research question below is formulated as follows.
Figure 1. “Thesis approach in three lenses”,
by Mitchel Böhi (2015)
Thesis Approach in Three Lenses
1.2 Motivation and Research Question
Motivation
1
APP
DEVELOPMENT
THE
APP MARKET
HUMAN-CENTERED
DESIGN
SOLUTION
Integration
Theories
Past &
Present
Reaction
Implications
Understanding
Benefits
Success | Fails | Barriers | Knowledge

12. Research Question
How may integrating a human-centered design approach enhance the development of mo-
bile applications? Presented below are sub-questions, which are used to guide the research.
a) Do mobile applications fail due to a lack of understanding the user, whom they are
being developed for?
b) How are the design, functionality, and intuitiveness for the user linked to the success
of an app?
c) How may developing with a human-centered design approach increase the usability
and interest of an app?
1.3 Problem Definition and Hypothesis
Problem Definition
Coming to understand why 80 to 90 percent of users download, then subsequently
delete applications after using them just once (Pramis, 2013) is crucial to analyze in order to
create a tool that assists in successful application development. Apps are a constant process
of redevelopment, which ultimately implies that an app is never finalized. Rahul Varshneya
co-founder of Arkenea – Silicon Valley’s premiere mobile app development company stated,
“It’s not because the apps sucked in their initial form, but because their designer failed to
collect the feedback and insight to rebuild them into something that people wanted to use”
(Varshneya, 2014). The problem arises when it reaches the market, but could using a HCD
approach contribute to eliminating or minimizing the problems before it reaches the market?
Hypothesis
Integrating human-centered design during app development surfaces user needs and de-
sires, which in turn minimizes app failure in the market.
1.4 Research Goal
The goals to achieve from research are to investigate the implications of what developing
a mobile application entails, the theories behind app development, and why a majority
of applications fail to meet the needs of the user. Examining the market of apps, the us-
er-interface, and technology with a strong connection to how humans interact with tech-
nology will set the guide for exploring human-centered design, user-centered design,
and human-computer interaction. As soon as the findings and insights have been made
and the criteria is properly defined, ethnographic research will be used to observe, shad-
ow, and conduct interviews with app developers and app users. When findings, insights,
and criteria have been properly scoped the guidelines will be set for the phase of ideation.
2

13. 1.5 Guiding the Reader
The visualization below seperates the thesis into four clearly defined sections (DISCOVER/
DEFINE/DEVELOP/DELIVER). In the first phase, after the initial insight, came the research
relating to: 1 – The App Market, 2 – App Development, and 3 – Human-centered Design. This
phase of DISCOVER consists of both primary and secondary research, which sets the frame-
work for exploring the theories and methodologies that lie within apps and human-centered
design. After the completion of the first phase comes the phase of DEFINE, where insights
will derive from facts and figures, the needs and behaviors of current and future users, and
conducting questionnaires with real app developers. The phase of DEVELOP will focus on
ideating and testing concepts as well as conducting ethnographic research, which will in turn
lead to the creation of prototypes. From prototype testing, insights will be gained and further
implementations will be integrated in order to DELIVER the final solution. To create a clear
differentiation of phases for the reader, the color which is associated with the section will be
placed on the page; as seen first on page 4, which should assist the reader in the understand-
ing of which stage is currently being spoken about. Furthermore, if viewing this as a pdf, or
on the CD provided on the last page, each section, appendix, table of contents, figure, and
table are completely interactive; which should provide for a more enhanced viewing.
Double Diamond Guiding the Process
Figure 2. From “Service Design Vancouver”, by C. Kaishin (2014). Hands On Workshop: Research Tec-
niques I. Retrieved February 15, 2015, from http://servicedesignvancouver.ca/tag/double-diamond/.
Adapted by Mitchel Böhi (2015).
3

14. DISCOVER
2. The Market
2.1 Why Apps Fail
In the following chapter, the focus will be placed on why apps fail and the technology that
coincides with developing applications. To gain a deeper understanding of why and how
apps fail, it is important to know if the answer to the problem is an “app” as a solution.
“Behind every good app is a good mobile strategy. When apps fail, it’s usually because the mo-
bile app strategy doesn’t take into account real user performance” (Kinsbruner, 2013). Apps are
known to excel in times of need, when making decisions, out of boredom, and when seeking
entertainment. However, where apps are not likely to fail is when they are solving a problem
that frequently arises (Albert, 2014). According to Kinsbruner (2013) it is crucial to eliminate
the guesswork for the user, and if an app fails to meet user needs, it is likely that the developer
lacked the consideration of a complete app journey. Eliminating or minimizing this guesswork
relies highly in the hands of the development team or in some cases the creator of the app.
2.1.1 Does the Problem Need an App?
Answering this central question is imperative before taking the plunge into creating an appli-
cation. “According to Flurry Analytics, gaming and Facebook make up nearly 50 percent of
time spent on mobile devices” (Colburn, 2014), which implies that there is only a 50 percent
space for a future app to succeed. Inspireo Media – Singapore based app Development Com-
pany, expects the client to answer four questions before they begin to work together. Out of
these four questions, one is inevitable: “Will your mobile app solve an area of pain for your
users”? If the answer is not clear, stronger focus must be placed on creating a minimum viable
product (MVP). Once an MVP is developed it is essential to test the idea, as Guy Kawasaki
stated, “the best market research is putting a product out and seeing if people will buy it”.
2.1.2 User-interface: Design, Functionality, and Intuitiveness
Design
When designing an application, or an MVP, the design decisions being made will in-
evitably not have all users in agreement (Barry & Olson, 2015). There are many fac-
ets to consider when creating apps, yet there are three essential areas that must re-
main at the center focus (Mindsea Development Inc., 2014). The following three areas
(a, b, and c) have been combined from Mindsea Development Inc., and In-House App
Accelerator Guide published by Apple Inc. The reason for the two chosen guides, is
due to Mindsea Development Inc.’s success in the market, and alternatively Apple be-
cause their guidelines are clearly defined and both incorporate substantial similarities.
a. Information Architecture
The placement of clear hierarchy will assist in attaching importance to each feature and item,
which will provide insight into the most important information being the most visible for the
4

15. user, and in turn the most valuable for the developer in selecting what is displayed on the
app’s interface.
b. User-interface
This will be the display that the user interacts with, giving reason for why it is crucial to keep
the goal of not only the business, but also, the goal of the users in mind. By following plat-
form-specific conventions, it is possible to meet the user at the crossroads of intuitive function-
ality, and visually understood design.
c. Visual Design
Visuals include shapes, tones, buttons, colors, icons and texture that give the user the feeling
of a rich experience implemented within a well-designed application. For example, if the iOS
platform alters everything to a flat-design for an upcoming update, it is important to corre-
spondingly follow the trend of what the user is already, or will become more acquainted with.
Functionality
If a user is unable to crack an app’s functionality in less than a minute, he or she will
move on and never come back (Lexel, ¶3, 2014). Questioning what each individual but-
ton, swipe, or slide will trigger for the customer is one aspect, but testing these aspects in
order to prove seamless functionality has an even greater importance before the user in-
teracts (Lexel, 2014). In functionality, sticking to the basics is not a bad thing, even Apple
made the mistake when introducing iOS 8 with voice messaging into the existing Short
Messaging Service (SMS). “Tweaking how a popular app or function works is as dangerous
as defusing a bomb; get it wrong and you can just be left with wreckage” (Arthur, 2014).
Intuitiveness
By definition, intuitiveness is the act of being perceived directly by intuition without ration-
al thought; a person’s intuition is the ability to do, without thinking about the act (Collins
English Dictionary, 2012). When Lifehacker – a website that provides tips and downloads
for “getting things done” posed the question: What is more important in an App: An intui-
tive user-interface (UI) or functionality? The results below revealed a near equal importance.
Intuitive User Interface Versus Excellent Functionality
Figure 3. From “What’s More Important in an App”, by A. Dachis (2011). What’s More Important in an
App. Retrieved March 4, 2015, from http://www.lifehacker.com. Adapted by Mitchel Böhi
5
Intuitive
user
interface
Excellent
functionality
Other
51.14% 42.24% 6.62%
1,833
1,514
237
Total Votes 3584

16. 2.1.3 Market Growth
When over 3,500 individuals, from the bubble comparison above, place enormous impor-
tance on both UI and functionality, it proves the point that intuition of what the user believes
the app should do, must be closely linked to what it will actually do.
China, being the world’s second largest app market behind the U.S., showed an increase of 10%
download growth rate from Quarter 3 - 2013 to Quarter 3 - 2014 (Hopping, 2014). In a recent
study of the app market industry, Clifford (2014) compared what the app market is today and
predicted what it will be by 2017. Based on previous statistics, Clifford (2014) predicts that the
app market will generate $77 billion, this is approximately 268 billion downloads, which is an
increase of 200% within the next two years. With this presumed increase in market growth and
decrease in market share, the importance relies on the need for an app that will trigger
satisfaction for the user. This is one aspect that should be integrated in order to become the
app people choose, use, share, and find value in.
2.2 Technology
In computers, such as handheld mobile devices, laptops, or desktop PC’s the platform is the
underlying computer system where app programs are able to run. The platform consists of a
computer system’s coordinating program, also referred to as an operating system, which is
built on a set of instructions giving the hardware the capability to manage the movement of
data software (Rouse, 2011). “Having the right mix of hardware and software can transform
virtualization from a computer science project to a technology that can be safely and simply
used in a production environment”(Kusnetzky, 2012). The key in mobile development is the
balance between hardware and software, as well as the mutual understanding between the
designer and the developer to create within these parameters. If executed properly, an app’s
usability will take into account the native functionality of the platforms, therefore present-
ing a well-designed and user-friendly application. Unfortunately, as previously mentioned,
according to the high failure rate, this remains easier said than done (Pramis, 2013).
2.2.2 Disruption of Industries by Disintermediation
Looking back to where it started, the information age began in the 1990s, which spawned
a new breed of business models that were previously unheard of. This, so called breed
changed the business environment, and is one aspect that remains as the recognizable
trend of disintermediation across many industries (Mills & Camek, 2004, Vol. 34, Iss. 9, ab-
stract section). This similarity continues as a commonality amongst apps, take for exam-
ple Uber, the world’s largest taxi company, serves as an example of a company that relies
solely on the interaction between the Uber App, the driver, and the user (Goodwin, 2015).
Uber places great emphasis on the app to function properly everyday. The convenience of
Uber is one major success factor to the business model, but the ease of the platform that
2.2.1 Platform Technology
6

17. is offered for the driver, and the simplistic UI, which provides convenience for the user,
are factors that determine to a large extent how the user interacts with the application.
“When humans talk with humans, they are able to use implicit situational information, or
context, to increase the conversational bandwidth. Unfortunately, this ability to convey ideas
does not transfer well to humans interacting with computers” (Dey, and Abowd, 2000). In
2007, Jaimes, Gatica-Perez, Sebe, and Huang proved this to be true by dissecting the meth-
odologies of Human-centered Computing (HCC). Although most methodologies begin with
an idea, which improves an experience, builds on existing technologies, or solves a problem,
each one is left with the problem of largely ignoring human issues. Sebe (2010) later went on
to write about HCC, stating “Thanks to computing technologies, our options for communi-
cating with others have increased, but that does not necessarily mean that our communica-
tions have become more efficient”. If the user does not find value in the creation, or may not
simply understand the functionality, the app will be misinterpreted and potentially deleted.
Analytical data is a starting point in trying to understand the users of an application. This
seems obvious, but currently only 21% of app developers are using analytics to understand
the strengths and weaknesses of an application. This decrease, from 38% in the previous year,
was due to a 50% increase of developers entering into the market, most of who do not yet
know the importance of tracking the data of an application (Wilcox, 2014). An article from
Forbes Magazine, Eight Tips For A Successful App stated that everything must be tracked and
measured, which ultimately implies that developers will understand “what happens inside
the app (what people are clicking and using), your traffic sources and which sources bring
the best users” (Larizadeh, 2013). The analytical data becomes a guide to the good and the
bad, but acknowledging this will assist in enhancing the features users approve of, and may
then exchange or alter what is unused or misinterpreted. Managing this data properly can
be a key asset and is referred to as Application Process Management (APS). In this process, a
well-educated developer begins to compare data entirely, which includes the amount of times
a button or feature has been pressed, up to the average amount of seconds the app is used for
(Larizadeh, 2013). It is important to mention that this is a necessary step after the develop-
ment process has been completed, and before the app has been made available to the public.
2.2.3 Human-centered Computing
2.2.4 Analytics
2.2.5 Sum Up
Before moving to the next chapter, which explores the development of mobile applications a
brief recapitulation is made to sum up the findings.
It is now clear that apps do not fail for simply one reason, but could be the cause of many
issues combined. If the app does not incorporate the user into the strategy, has a lack of
7

18. understanding user needs, or is an app that is not solving a problem, the app may poten-
tially fail. Discovering if the idea requires an app is merely one aspect, however, once the
decision has been made to move forward, there must be equal importance divided between
the app’s user interface and functionality. Looking into platform technology surfaced the
meaning of what it entails to provide a seamless experience on a given device, and lastly,
by combining what may be gained from tracking the user, to how the app is being func-
tioned, assisted in arriving at how to manage the process in the backend of app development.
In the following chapter the goal is to explore what an app is, while moving forward to
what it takes to develop apps, the necessary tools for development, and what guidelines
and restrictions must be followed. Furthermore, the current processes of app creation, alter-
native approaches, and the importance of an application developer will be brought to the
surface. From these understandings the questions of what, why, for whom, and how, will be
researched in detail in order to validate the most important points, which will in turn provide
an overview for the framework in order to explore Human-centered Design.
Mobile application development by definition is a set of processes that assist in the creation of
apps for mobile devices; arising only after web development originated (Rouse, 2011). Mobile
devices are also referred to as wireless computing devices, such as, smartphones or tablets.
The development for these devices requires a skill set of coding1
, for example, Swift, JavaS-
cript, Objective C, and C++. One critical difference between the two developments is that,
mobile applications, unlike web applications, are often written specifically to take advantage
of the unique features a particular mobile device offers; such as accessing the phonebook, or
camera, which is natively stored in the devices platform technology (Rouse, 2011).
3. Mobile Application Development
3.1 Definition
The word “App” is an abbreviation derived from the word application, which is run on a
mobile device (Janssen, 2014). It is software, which is specifically designed for the use on
smartphones or tablet computers such as iPhone, Android, Blackberry, or iPad devices. Apps
are created solely for a specified platform, and only function in accordance with the platform
it is being developed for. Mobile apps may extend the reach and productivity of daily respon-
sibilities or business tasks. “Once you equip your mobile device and/or your employees’
mobile devices with apps, then you and they can perform all sorts of business functions while
out of the office…”(Campbell, 2011). Apps may also be viewed as a facilitator that assists
in an overall business model, as mentioned in section 2.2.2. At best it is an isolated piece of
software that stands alone to satisfy the needs of the customer whom it is associated with.
3.2 What is an App?
1
A programming language developed by coders and designed to communicate directly with computers, these
are essentially lists of words and figures married together which provide functionality.
8

19. Developing an app is an iterative process that continues on for the lifecycle of the applica-
tion, yet most clients believe that when it goes public it is complete. This does not necessarily
imply that the app be changed due to the user’s feedback, but instead due to the app store re-
quirements, which in most cases will require platform changes for regulation purposes. App
Store Optimization (ASO) is when an app may function beautifully one month, however the
next month may possibly require alterations for the app to continue running smoothly; due
to the platform changes in coding. Based on a survey taken by 100 iOS, Android, and HTML5
developers there are a multitude of steps, or processes, that are said to take approximately
“18 weeks to build v12
of a native app”, before reaching the app store (Kinvey, 2013). With
the amount of time spent to reach the market, it is highly beneficial to launch an MVP, which
can eliminate future costs, and save time in the end for both the developer and the client
(Chernov & Wasmer, 2013).
3.2.1 Developing Apps
3.2.2 Tools for Development
Whether developing for Apple, Android, Blackberry or Windows, these platforms all require
the download of a Software Development Kit (SDK). An SDK, also referred to as a devkit,
is a specific software package or software framework that allows for the creation of mobile
applications (Wikipedia, 2015). The SDK sets the guidelines and restrictions for the feasi-
bility of a project based on the platform chosen for development. Although an SDK is only
the beginning for tools needed in development, it is the only way to gain access to a devices
native functionality. Each tool that is represented in the market today specializes in a specific
platform, for example Android by Google. These tools are used to code within the parameters
and guidelines of the platform choosen and can assist the developer in creating feasible prod-
ucts. To view a list of tools that are present in the market, please see Appendix A.
3.2.3 Guidelines and Restrictions
Each development platform incorporates a clear set of guidelines, restrictions, and policies
that must be followed. To view these guidelines please refer to Appendix B. The first phase of
creating an application begins with accepting the Program License Agreement (PLA). By ac-
cepting this contract, the agreement binds the developer to all terms and conditions in order
to utilize the platform. The second phase of creating an application consists of understanding
and developing within these agreement terms. Furthermore, it is proven that an agile soft-
ware development approach may speed up the entrance of a product to market. According
to a study of 3,501 participants from the global development community, 88% of these organ-
izations use agile development, which is a drastic increase of 54% from 2011 (Gaona, 2014).
Understanding the stages for what is required to develop an application is crucial, howev-
er, this is just one factor. Being prepared for possible changes an application might require
will considerably outweigh any comprehension for the understanding of developing an app.
2
„v“ symbolizes version and the number (1) associated with it gives the developer the insight on what version is
currently being worked on, altered, or released into the market.
9

20. The steps also referred to as the process, remain to be the utmost crucial part of mobile ap-
plication development. The issue with a majority of these processes is that the user or target
market, which the app is being established for may not be taken into account before the app
is developed. Developing a process with the user in mind has great benefits, but in order to
do that, “you have to admit that you don’t know the answers to your problems” (Bodine,
2012). The process presented below depicts the development stages from a random selection
of 5 top-tier app development firms from the US, UK, Middle East, Asia, and Australia; see
Appendix C, for original processes. Although similarities are presented, there is no process
that takes the end-user into account during the development of applications. When research-
ing each process in detail, there was no mention of a real user, or an MVP to support a further
step. Without the combination of real user insights and understanding how an app will func-
tion, may lack the full-potential needed in order to succeed when launched to market.
Five Development Processes Combined
Figure 4. Five different development processes combined from research: Created by Mitchel Böhi.
On March 8, 2015
3.3 The Process
3.4 Creating an App
3.4.1 Application Developer
The application developer, also referred to as an App Developer, is a person who writes code
that meets the specific requirements of a chosen platform (Howe, 2010). The developer is
responsible for taking diagrams, usually developed on paper, and translating them into func-
tioning technology that will be used by the end-user. After speaking with David Greminger,
a software engineer at 1up GmbH, the needs of a developer arose quickly. Greminger stated
that, “working on digital products means that the tools that are being used must be 100% dig-
ital to make the job at hand most efficient”. Greminger concluded that during development,
the way to work most effectively is not by opening a book, but in turn, to search the web for
answers, or asking another developer via Skype. To validate what was stated by Greminger,
five alternative interviews were conducted to explain that the best means for a developer lie
within digital tools. To view the interview questionnaire, please see Appendix D.
10
1 PLAN
2
3
4
5
STRATEGY/CONCEPT
ENQUIRY
ANALYZE
DEFINE
DESIGN & DEVELOP
DESIGN & LAYOUT
DESIGN
RESEARCH
DESIGN
TEST
DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
DEVELOP
LAUNCH
LAUNCH
TESTING
DEPLOY
DEBUG
SUPPORT
SUPPORT
RELEASE
MAINTAIN
DELIVERY

21. 3.4.2 Different Approaches: Native, Web, and Hybrid
Native, web, and hybrid are three approaches that may be used when creating a mobile
application (Janssen, 2014). A native app is the highest performing, and most reliable of the
three. It utilizes the features encaptured within the operating system for the chosen plat-
form, for example, Apple iOS, which in some cases does not require Internet to perform the
usable functionality. Janssen (2014) referred to a native app as being the most costly to pro-
duce, because it is capable of accessing a smartphone’s built-in devices such as the camera,
keyboard, and GPS. Alternatively the web app, as described, is an application that may be
accessed through a website, which is designed to function specifically on smartphones while
using a webpages Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP); an application protocol for informa-
tion systems. The cost for creating a web app remains more expensive than a native app, but
“the benefit of this approach is that it costs about the same to develop apps that run on both
operating systems rather than just on one” (Rubens, 2013). A hybrid app is the combination
of both a native and web app, which uses cross-platform compatibility while being capable
of accessing a phone’s hardware. Taking a hybrid approach is known to “combine the best
of both worlds” by using common code to deploy on a wider range of platforms (Rudolph,
2014). Each approach contains pros and cons, however being able to understand which ap-
proach best meets the needs of the app strategy, while keeping the customer in mind is the
starting point for the initial decision-making.
3.4.3 Costs: Realized and Unforeseen
Joseph Carrolo from ArcTouch, a full-service mobile app development company posed the
statement, “How much will my app cost to develop? That’s the wrong question”. The app
market is still young, under a decade old; at six years-to-date (Apple Inc., 2011). The assump-
tion would be that with time comes lowered cost of production, unfortunately this assump-
tion is false. The initial investment for creating a basic app (no integration, standard controls,
minimal design, and project management) ranges from 8,000 to 10,000 USD. A medium to
complex enterprise app ranges from 100,000 to 150,000 USD without adding in the (20% +/-)
(Rubens, 2013). Marc Benioff, the CEO of salesforce.com, a cloud computing company stat-
ed, “The only constant in the technology industry is change”. The monthly, weekly, or even
daily change that is associated with application development may be costly, and with these
uncertainties in mind, each creator must be prepared to invest at least 20% more than the
initial cost of the application. This extra 20% takes many things into account, some of which
include, bugs, new features, customer requests, updates, and other means that would require
the developer or development team to continue enhancing the application (Facemire, 2015).
Creating an app begins with an idea, and with this idea, the app is capable of producing many
different effects. Some of these effects include enhancing usability, minimizing steps of a task,
new tools that turn into a brand, or at best, solving an existing problem. “You see a problem
3.5 What is being created?
11

22. and come up with lots of ideas. From those ideas, you shortlist some, and a few more – to
finally arrive at ‘The Big Idea”(AppLabb.com, 2013). Initially, before narrowing down exactly
what will be created, it is crucial to have customer validation in order for an app to perform
to its full potential. Varshneya (2013) poses the question, “How do you know whether there is
a large enough pool of people that face the same problems you are trying to solve?” The only
way to consciously answer this is to create an MVP or prototype to test and find out if the
idea is worth pursuing (Varshneya, 2013). Creating an MVP requires potential users to inter-
act in the early stages of app development, with these users, items and functions can then be
validated and the idea may become more concrete, while at the same time eliminating errors.
3.5.1 The right questions at the right time
Warren Berger, a Freelance Columnist at Fast Company, and the author of A More Beau-
tiful Question, “explains why it’s critical for entrepreneurs to start asking the “beautiful”
questions that can create business breakthroughs” (May, 2014). Cross-questioning is cru-
cial as it may surface knowledge about how a feature will or should function, how the user
will be operating it, and all of the “what if’s” that when not answered might appear last-
minute. Obtaining the answers to these questions essentially eliminates problems that may
occur in the future. What most fail to do is go directly to the user, and as Bryan Meadan
– a sociologist and web developer since 1996 validates by stating, “usability testing can
show you how wrong you were in thinking that everyone is going to understand that click-
ing “Checkout” will get them to “check out” your product catalogue”. User testing can
assist in validating why an app is being created and what benefits it will bring to the user.
3.6 Why is it being created?
3.6.1 Product or Service
An app essentially is a product, however what is being provided is a service. As mentioned
in section 3.4.3, on average, apps may potentially run upwards of 75’000 USD, and from sec-
tion 3.4.2, it is clear that there are a variety of different ways to begin creating an app. The
most important reason, which developers mistakenly surpass, is the value behind the mobile
application for the end-user. The decision of choosing to create an app over a website ought
to validate the reason for moving forward, while keeping in mind what Aaron Maxwell,
founder of mobile web design agency Mobile Web Up stated, “…a well-made app can pro-
vide a far better user experience than even the best mobile websites are capable of right now”
(Maxwell, 2011).
3.7 Whom is it being created for?
3.7.1 The Target Market
To understand the mobile app market and its successes, it is imperative to deep dive into
the future needs of the customer. Robert McKim, once head of Stanford University’s product
12

23. design program, coined the term “Needfinding”. “He hypothesized that designers who
wanted to have the greatest impact on product development needed to be involved at the
earliest stages of product definition” (Patnaik, Becker, 1999). Patnaik et. al. (1999) went on
to say that researchers, or in this case app creators, may understand what is desired, but the
importance lies in providing the customer with leeway to guide the activities and discussion
in order for the creator to obtain valuable input that can then be implemented.
3.8 How will it work?
3.8.1 Process Organization
Benjamin Franklin stated, “If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail!” This statement re-
mains to be the truth especially in app development. Being process organized is the first step
in being able to manage the development process efficiently. Managing the knowledge, skills,
tools, resources, techniques, and systems, may be cumbersome, but without close manage-
ment it may possibly derive the failing point of the application (Harrison-Broninski, 2005).
Although not everything may be planned, such as changes in technology, market behavior, or
even software errors, it is important to be aware that in most cases problems will arise; and
the developer must plan accordingly (Apple Inc., 2011). One thing is for sure, all users are
different and no process will be perfect, “the best we can do is design for specific experiences
and promote certain behaviors”, but no process will be able to predict how the early-majority
of adopters will react and interact (Gube, 2010).
3.8.2 Planning for Error
Error is not always in the control of the developer; some error will be out of reach. The Mac
Developer Library states that, “Almost every app encounters errors”. Although this proves
to be true, it does not say one should not plan for them. Errors may not be simple ten min-
ute fixes, and in most cases errors rely on a developer to fix them; increasing spending for
the creator. When organizing the process, the dedication of time relies highly on everything
running smoothly, which in technology is often not the case. “While all developers strive for
perfection, the occasional programmer error may also occur” (Mac Developer Library, n.d.).
3.8.3 ROI: Free or Paid
The mobile app marketing blog – AppCase, along with many others, poses the question that
an app creator continues to struggle with: Free vs. paid apps, which choice will come to
be more beneficial to my company (Butters, 2014)? Looking at a recent study released by
Flurry Analytics – A leader in mobile analytics, simplified the answer with the majority of
downloaded apps remaining free of purchase. Free apps monetize on the approach of mo-
bile marketing or in-app purchases; namely selling tools, items, or tokens once the app has
already been downloaded (Orfanos, 2014). The alternative, purchasing upfront, is more diffi-
cult to maintain as it requires the user to pay before trying. The graph depicted on the follow-
ing page, illustrates the growth of free apps compared to purchased apps from 2011 to 2013.
13

24. The Answer is Increasingly Free
Figure 5. From “Increasingly the Price of Apps is Free”. from Flurry Analytics, 2013. Retrieved March
1, 2015, from http://www.flurry.com. Adapted by Mitchel Böhi
3.8.4 Sum Up
To conclude, and before looking into the design-thinking approach of human-centered de-
sign, a brief recapitulation is made to explain the findings.
Firstly, the difficulties of creating an application, the technology that is needed, and the re-
strictions and guidelines that apply were drawn out. What can now be addressed, from this
reasearch, is that apps not only take experience to develop, but even the most experienced
are continually forgetting about the user. This was addressed by looking more in-depth into
the processes that are currently being used for development and which continually lack the
interests of the end-user. Secondly, looking into three different approaches (native, web, and
hybrid), and how those are linked to the cost of development were analyzed in order to pro-
ceed forward to the questions of what, why, whom, and how apps are being created. From
these questions it is now understood that the importance of design in collaboration with the
user is the most effective way to offer a product/service that can be understood as incorpo-
rating value for the user. In conclusion, the overlying matter was that there was no simple
process for an app creator to follow, and additionally, most processes which are present, do
not take the user into account. With apps having a high failure rate in close combination with
a large investment, it is clear that a process which can assist in decreasing app failure and
putting the human at the center focus can benefit future app developers to launch better apps
to the market.
14
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
60 %
50 %
40 %
30 %
20 %
10 %
0 %
2011 2012 2013
80%
84%
90%
Free
$0.99
$1.99
$2.99+

25. 4. Human-centered Design
4.1 Definition
In this chapter, the main focus will be placed on defining, explaining, and exploring the
phases of human-centered design (HCD). Yet, in order to understand the importance that
HCD might have within app development, a look into user-centered design and human-com-
puter interaction will assist in a deeper understanding of the connection between users and
mobile devices. Lastly, a case study about how HCD has been integrated will contribute in
determining the important factors that must be taken into consideration for the development
of a tool that will equally assist app creators and app developers.
Human-centered design is a problem solving process, utilized for the purpose of analyzing
before, after, and throughout the design phases; rather than when the product or service has
been fully developed. It is integrated as a method for testing the validity of assumptions
in regards to a user’s behavior in real world situations. One major benefit of HCD is the aim to
minimize the difficulties for designers to interpret a first-time user, as well as the ex-
periences they encounter with the product (Jacobson, 2000). HCD is also referred to as
Hear Create Deliver (IDEO, n.d.).
During the hear phase, the objective is to listen to the people, to understand what is best for
them, and to become aware of what their overarching needs are. The create phase is a chance
to be innovative, while taking what is learned from the hear phase and acknowledging how
important details may be integrated into what is being designed (IDEO, n.d.). By realizing
the creation, comes the deliver phase, which takes what is made and provides it to the cus-
tomer. The HCD approach, being an iterative process, initially takes what has been created in
prototype form and tests it with real users (Akpem, 2015). In apps this is referred to as beta
testing, “when you beta test an app, you let a set of people try out the app before it’s released
to the general public” (Microsoft Dev Center, 2015). Alternatively, there are app developers
that do not find the need or time for testing, but, “by collaborating closely with beta testers,
developers can confirm whether the software is headed in the right direction and that it
meets user needs” (McNiff, 2013). The issue with beta testing is that the user is only integrat-
ed before launch, which in most cases provides valuable insights far too late in the process.
Human-centered design was not the first design thinking approach. One of the first predeces-
sors of HCD was participatory design; first used by Plato, a philosopher who was known for
many things, but moreover was known to seek advice from his people. “One of the main dis-
advantages of participatory design is its negligence towards user experience and stakeholder
input. Usability was king, but emotional response to gadgetry was largely ignored” (IthinkIde-
sign.wordpress.com, n.d). Derived from a lack of interest for the user came human-centered
design, where the focus began in technology and product systems, and in the early 1990s shift-
ed from a techno-driven focus to a humanized one. Gleiser (2011) argues that the shift, which
4.1.1 Tracing HCD in Development
15

26. was once experienced, will no longer be what is used in the future. Gleiser went on to inter-
view 300 scientists in 2011 that predicted by 2100, computers would work harmoniously with
humans. If this poses to be true, HCD combined with HCC; as mentioned in 2.2.3, will remain
significantly vital for the future rise of combining technology and human needs. To combine
HCD and HCC involves a process that helps surface what is desirable, feasible, and viable.
4.2 Phases of HCD
4.2.1 Inspiration, Ideation, Implementation
The three phases of, inspiration, ideation, and implementation combined make up what is
known as the design thinking process. David Kelley, co-founder of IDEO, coined the term
after he continually found himself inserting the word thinking, when people asked him
about design (Brown and Wyatt, 2010). Prior to this article, Brown (2007) referred to design
thinking as a discipline that is used by design professionals. Brown goes on to say, that this
discipline “uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what
is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer
value and market opportunity”. Design thinking combined with the following three lenses
will be used and assist in managing the creation of a tool that will assist app developers in
determining what the user finds value in, and how an organization can justify the means.
4.2.2 The Lenses of HCD
Brown (2007) went on to describe the following three lenses of this approach; desirability
– what do people desire, feasibility – what is technically and organizationally feasible, and
viability – what is financially viable. These three
lenses create the following helpful questions;
“Do people really want this widget? Am I solv-
ing a problem, or just adding to the noise”(Lamp,
2014)? Only when the lenses on the right are ful-
ly understood and developed, may one begin to
create solutions. The overlap amongst the lens-
es will result in a central understanding of how
each lens plays a role in the creation of a final
solution. The final solution may include prod-
ucts, services, environments, organizations,
and modes of interaction (Human Centered De-
sign Toolkit, Vol. 2, p. 6). “It is the lens through
which we view the world through the entire de-
sign process. Once we have identified the uni-
verse of what is Desirable, we begin to view
our solutions through the lenses of Feasibili-
ty and Viability” (“The IDEO Human-”, 2009).
The Three Lenses of HCD
Figure 6. From “Human Centered Design
Toolkit”, by IDEO (2009). HCD Toolkit. Re-
trieved March 8, 2015, from HCD Toolkit {Elec-
tronic Version}. Adapted by M.Böhi
16
SOLUTIONS
FEASIBILITY
DESIRABILITY
VIABILITY

27. 4.3 Importance of HCD
Think of HCD as a quiz before a big test. Understanding whom the target market is may well
be the first step of the process, however, this is only the beginning. Taking a step back, HCD
supports designers by guiding them to test prototypes and gaining feedback before moving
forward to developing the final product. “When done well, a human-centered approach fuels
the creation of products that resonate more deeply with an audience — ultimately driving en-
gagement and growth” (Thomsen, 2013). The goal of HCD is to secure an accurate product the
first time around, rather than consistently adding capital in order to correct the mistakes and
maintain the project goal.Alternatively, customer engagement is one major facet when bringing
a product to market. If the product is completed correctly, sends an accurate message, and users
understand its purpose, then hopefully, there may only be room for growth (Thomsen, 2013).
Currently there are an abundance of products in the market that receive the funding needed
to hit the shelves, but all too often, designers question why it does not gain the customer sat-
isfaction they had hoped for. This may be a result of designing on ones own instinct, which
ultimately leads to a lack of time tested with real users. This is where HCD may assist in
app development, by changing a color, moving a button, or even something as simple as the
shape of the icon. All aspects are taken into consideration when using HCD; however, when
your goal is time-to-market, it becomes difficult to follow the necessary steps. The follow-
ing steps work as a systematic approach where one follows another, and all carry an equal
importance (“The IDEO Human-” 2009). Below from left to right is the iterative process that
allows designers to consciously move step-by-step while creating solutions that bring value
to the customer. As seen by the separation in boxes, each main phase (H, C, D) consists of
sub-phases that follow one another; the description of each phase can be seen in Appendix F.
The Human-centered Design Process
Figure 7. “The HCD Process”, by IDEO (n.d). HCD Toolkit. Retrieved March 8, 2015, from HCD Toolkit
{Electronic Version}. Adapted by Mitchel Böhi
17
TIME
A
B
S
T
R
A
C
T
OBSERVATIONS
A
B
S
T
R
A
C
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
STORIES
THEMES
OPPORTUNITIES
SOLUTIONS
PROTOTYPES
IMPLENTATION
PLAN
H C D

28. 4.4 User-centered System Design
4.4.1 Definition
Also known as Architectural Design and Interface Design, as seen previously in section 2.1.2,
User-centered System Design (UCS) is an approach that aims at, “the creation of environ-
ments for enhanced interaction and problem solving” (Hooper, 1986). As an approach, UCS
acts as an analysis of task complexity that may be answered through thorough, yet simple
questioning. Donald Norman – the man who coined the term user-experience design, gave an
example of this type of questioning. Norman went on to say, “Suppose there are two variables
to be controlled. How should we build a device to control these variables? Why not simply
have two controls, one for each? What is the problem” (Norman, 1986)? This type of elemen-
tary questioning may provide an effective understanding of the system that is being devel-
oped. During app development, this type of questioning assists in creating scenarios, and fur-
thermore, finds solutions to problems upfront, rather than when the app reaches the market.
4.4.2 User Experience
Ward (2014, pp.37-38) explicitly stated three experiences that must be tested before the us-
er-experience (UX) may provide value for the customer. The first, pre-site experience, is put-
ting the user in contact with the UI that has been developed, in order to determine where
unsuccessful searches, and lack of clicks on an item derive from. The second, navigation to
site, is closely linked to persona research and ought to evaluate the success of search words,
phrases, landing pages, and user journeys. The third, on-site experience, must identify and
evaluate any site confusion that may latter be integrated in order to improve the overall site
experience. Integrating such phases may assist in determining the needs and behaviors of
the user. Overall, success of a digital product “hinges on just one thing: how users perceive
it” (Gube, 2010). The experience that a user has when pursuing an application will solely
determine if that user will continue to engage or quickly leave behind what is being offered.
User-experience should be determined in the earliest stages of the development process in
order to validate the needs and desires of the target customer or market.
4.4.3 User Needs and Behaviors
In order to understand the needs of a user there must initially be an understanding of where
the line is drawn between needs and wants. “In most cases their needs are not written on
their faces, in most cases they themselves do not know what they need, they can only articu-
late what they want” (Baars, 2012, p.86). One aspect that determines the success of an app is
identifying the need of the target market. From this, understanding opportunities for action
may only begin once a detailed description of customers’ behavior and their environments
have been understood. Without proper research, the emphasis on understanding the user’s
needs and behaviors will continue to remain a hunch that has little to no value (Patnaik et al,
1999).
18

29. 4.5 Human-computer Interaction
4.5.1 Understand to be Understood
Human-computer Interaction (HCI) emerged in the 1980s, shortly before the launch of the
Apple Macintosh (MacKenzie, 2013). HCI owes a great deal to previous disciplines, such as
human factors and ergonomics, and may be understood as the synergy between psychology
and computer science. As it implies, HCI is the correlation of how a human interacts with dig-
ital means, which requires the individual to manipulate a device in order to create a function
(MacKenzie, 2013). When creating an app for a user it is crucial to understand what occurs in
the brain when the user interacts with a computer system. There are three processors of the
brain (perceptual, cognitive, and motor) that must simultaneously work together in order for
a user to perform functions on an app’s interface. Please see Appendix G for a full depiction of
how the brain performs in order to manifest function when coming in contact with a computer.
4.5.2 Human-Machine Reconfiguration
The reconfiguration of interfaces might open up the opportunity for a computer to be-
come “self-explanatory” and in theory, once analyzed and implemented correctly, may
then guide the user similarly as a human coach (Suchmann, 1985). Although easier said
then done, Weyers (2011) refers to reconfiguration as having multiple approaches from
different directions, such as developing models and languages for a specific context, in
developing a tool that supports various ideas and concepts. “The general problem that
the designer of an ‘interactive’ system must somehow contend with is how to ensure
that the machine responds appropriately to the user’s actions” (Suchmann, 1985, p.77).
4.5.3 Interaction Design
The average app user is becoming further accustomed to quick, seamless, and engaging jour-
neys. With increasing expectations for visitors to ensure an easy user-experience and the
most up-to-date interaction design (IxD) there remains a higher probability the app will not
succeed if the user is not understood (Bluestone, 2014). This is not to say however that user
behaviors cannot or must not be altered with IxD. As Jerry Cao (2015) points out, user habits
may be a huge advantage, however, if simple habits may be formed through repeating easy
actions, the user might also benefit. To change what has been previously embedded in prior
knowledge of a user, the app must cue the user to interact, and in turn, the app must provide
the feeling of reward once used correctly. Since an app cannot explicitly state that a user is not
performing a function correctly, an app must in turn, provide the ability for a user to correct a
mistake. Obtaining this knowledge should take place in the process of development not when
the app has already reached the market. Discovering how a user interacts with an app once
it reaches the market, is far too late to satisfy the needs and behaviours. In turn, the user will
feel misunderstood and the interaction between the user and the application will slowly di-
minish. As Pramis (2013) mentioned, the chances of this taking place are almost guaranteed.
19

30. 4.6 A Case Study of HCD in App Development
A recently published article by Senongo Akpem, from Smashing Magazine, analyzed the
successful HCD process from Domain7. Domain7 (D7) – a Vancouver based firm, “Creates
innovative, empathetic digital experiences that help organizations grow and communities
connect”. D7 was approached by www.vancouver.ca to improve the online experience for the
visitors of the website who are moving towards mobile engagement. The challenge for D7
was that Government websites were typically complex, content heavy, and contained thou-
sands of documents. With this in mind, the goal was to create an experience that catered to
the most basic user level. In place, D7 had four main priorities. The following priorities are
listed in order of hierarchy:
a. Testing - The user is always the number one focus.
b. Timeline - The client had an aggressive schedule, which needed to be managed
accordingly in the process.
c. MVP/ASAP - No time was wasted, and testing was able to begin with the user,
resulting in the minimum viable product (MVP) being built in three weeks.
d. Do not start from scratch - Using what www.vancouver.ca had already had in place
greatly assisted in focusing highly on the design, and less on recreating what had
already existed.
D7 mentioned that user testing was paramount for the success of the application, as well as
using real personas that could trial the prototypes, ultimately enhancing the usability-testing
phase. By using what was already in place, the firm could simply embed code for immedi-
ate testing and analyzing, which brought value to understanding what was being used, and
alternatively what the user did not interact with. The end resulted in a mobile website (web-
based application) with intuitive navigation which assisted users in differentiating between
complex documentation and simplified functionality. This would in turn guide the user in
completing the task more efficiently. When asked what made the product successful, D7 men-
tioned the following points: collaboration with the teams (internal and external), conducting
user testing, and developing a user-experience during the process; keeping everyone in mind.
In conclusion, and to complete the reasearch phase a recapulation of what has been discov-
ered is stated in order to incorporate a synopsis before moving into the DEFINE phase, where
findings and insights are surfaced in order to create criteria, which can then be analyzed and
measured.
Looking into the process that D7 used to enhance the mobile experience for users has assisted in
understanding the important facets of how HCD can be applied to enhance user experience on
mobile devices. This case study was choosen because it is the only study found that represents
20
5. Conclusion

31. 21
HCD in app development, but also one that encaptures the importance of the previous sections;
Interaction Design, Human-Machine Reconfiguration, and Human-computer Interaction. The
takeaways that can be noted from the previously mentioned sections are that firstly, it proves
greatly beneficial to understand the user that an app is being developed for. Secondly, through
design a system should be self-explanatory and function as the user believes it should, and not
solely as the developer believes it should. Thirdly, facts have been presented, which proves
that how a user interacts with a device can be the success factor for the developer to gain app
recognition and likewise for the user to find value in the app that is being offered.
It is now clear that discovering the needs and understanding the behaviors of a user is cru-
cial to the success of developing a well-perceived application. Yet, without testing the user
experience of an application, before it reaches the market, it could leave the developer with a
misperceived notion about what he or she thought would initially work. Defining User-cen-
tered System Design helped to acknowledge the important questioning that could take place
before the process of development begins, and how these questions can benefit and validate
the creation. From research the answer is clear that the importance lies in testing what is being
developed, and the tool that has proven to be most successful in testing is the Human-cen-
tered Design process; also referred to as the design thinking process. By integrating the HCD
approach real scenarios can be tested, and the benefit for the developer is that by using an ap-
proach that takes real users into account the developer can find the needs, behaviours, errors,
and opportunities before the app has reached development. This is not only highly beneficial
for the end-user but will also save time and costs during the phases of development.
Exploring why apps fail helped to understand if the price associated with an app was one
aspect of why they are not perceived well in the market. From this it became clear that the
majority of apps are accessible by a free download and that the rate of decrease for purchased
apps is growing 5% annually. The costs were looked into after acknowledging the processes
that are currently being used in the market. Looking into a selection of five processes it was
noted that not one process took the user into account, which was a direct link to why apps
fail, and subsequently why 80-90% of the time an app is deleted directly after being down-
loaded. So if this is commonly the case, then the answer to eliminating this failure is provid-
ing the market with a minimum viable product, which may be tested in order to gain insights
and feedback so that the idea could become more concrete, and in turn more valuable for the
end-user.
Furthermore, surfaced from research, there are three types of applications; native, web, and
hybrid. To determine what type should be choosen, it must best fit the idea, strategy, and
target market in order to benefit not only the developer but equally the user. After speaking
with an expert in development, it quickly became understood that developers are willing to
use new tools, but they must have specific facets incorporated. These facets have been taken
into consideration and can be viewed in the following section; of Findings and Insights.

32. Between 80 to 90 percent of user’s download, then subsequently delete applications after
using them just once (Pramis, 2013). There are many factors for why this is taking place, but
as Rahul Varshneya co-founder of Arkenea – Silicon Valley’s premiere mobile app company
stated, “It’s not because the apps sucked in their initial form, but because their designer failed
to collect the feedback and insight to rebuild them into something that people wanted to
use”. Derived from research came clear facts that the implications of creating a successful app
had a 50 percent chance connected with it. According to Flurry Analytics – a leader in mobile
analytics, “gaming and Facebook make up nearly 50 percent of the time spent on mobile de-
vices” (Colburn, 2014). With this being said, Inspireo Media App Development requires the
client to answer an extremely important question: Will your mobile app solve an area of pain
for your users? The first step to a successful app (outside of gaming) is for the answer to this
question to be, yes! If like most, uncertainty arises, the best plan of action is to create a mini-
mum viable product, as Guy Kawasaki states, “the best market research is putting a product
out and seeing if people will buy it”.
When Lifehacker – a website that provides tips and downloads for “getting things done”
posed the question: What’s more important in an App: An intuitive user interface or function-
ality? The results showed a near equal importance.
• Intuitive user-interface – 51.14% (1,833 votes)
• Excellent functionality – 42.24% (1,514 votes)
• Other – 6.61% (237 votes)
To meet the needs of future or current app developers there should be a strong focus on the
user interface and functionality of the tool being developed to meet and satisfy developer,
creator, and user needs.
The process that will be created to guide the user should keep the approach of agile software
development in mind. It should be easily altered, exchangeable, work with collaboration,
and be able to assist in excelling cross-functional teams. According to a study from 3,501
participants from the global development community, 88% of these organizations use agile
development, which is an increase of 54% from 2011.
In order to show benefits for the user the solution should provide examples of past fail-
ures and successes and why they failed and succeeded. Furthermore, there should be
a connection made with the average costs of creating an app and the added percent-
age that is tacked on. This brings up the point of referencing; where real developers, en-
trepreneurs, and CEOs of apps provide quotations for the creator to consider; for
example, Robert McKim – once head of Stanford University’s product design program hy-
pothesized, “that designers who wanted to have the greatest impact on product development
22
6. Findings and Insights
DEFINE

33. 23
From Findings to Criteria
Table 1. “From Findings to Critera”, Created by Mitchel Böhi on March 27, 2015.
needed to be involved at the earliest stages of product definition” (Patnaik & Becker, 1999).
From research, a multitude of resources and quotations have surfaced, but closely connect-
ing them with the tool being developed should assist in guiding the user to interact with the
steps that will be provided.
Human-centered design has surfaced processes which will assist, if not emulate, how the tool
for HCD app development will function. With HCD at the center of the tool the need to ex-
plain steps and theories about how each step works should be integrated in order to guide the
user for a complete understanding. The importance of this guidance should be represented
through visually understood diagrams so that a developer or creator can follow accordingly.
Seen below in the table, From Findings to Criteria, it can been seen how the criteria which
was developed was derived from the combination of findings and insights. From theories and
research came findings. The findings were then analyzed and filtered to the most important
ones, which are represented in the table below. The insights were established in order to sur-
face the most important aspects that need to be included in the final solution. The criteria will
be tested to determine how the solution fulfils the criteria based on a system of measurment.
F I N D I N G S I N S I G H T S C R I T E R I A
One main reason apps fail is because
they do not take the user into account
HCD began in technology and
product systems, but was shifted from
tecno-driven to humanized
The most commonly used tools in
app development, if not digitalized,
are accessible by digital means
Based on studies, “Interactive Usa-
bility” is not only important for apps/
users but also developer interaction
From research it is clear that devel-
opers and ideators equally value past
examples (videos and pictures)
From research it is clear that an equal
focus should be placed on intuitive
design and functionality for the solution
Requirements, guidelines, and restric-
tions vary greatly depending on the
platform chosen for creation
App development requires a lot of
knowledge in terminology, most of
which is only understood by dev’s
There is no app development process
that places the user at the center
focus when developing
The reverse in shift back to technol-
ogy will need to show the benefits
HCD can have for app development
Interviews with developers clarified
that a tool which was not digital
would get lost or unused
The most used tools today are
interactive and to be valuable a tool
must be easily used/understood
Being able to interact through pictures
and videos provides the base for dis-
cussion and encourages interaction
Incorporating what the current users
value can create the necessary link to
be the accepted tool by the market
A tool for app development is only
valuable for the user if it clearly
seperates the differences in platforms
For app development to be under-
stood, so must the terminology that is
associated within the development
The creation of an app development
process that places the user at the
center of design and development
Through an HCD approach the solu-
tion should clearly represent equal
benefits for the devs. and users
The solution should be 1. completely
digital, or 2. have the capability to be
accessed through digital means
The solution should be able to handle
the path which the user wishes to en-
gage in. The user must have a choice
The solution should include examples
of what HCD can do, so the user finds
value and can see the benefits
The solution should be equally focused
on intuitive design and functionality in
order to be easily understood
The solution should clearly
differentiate between platforms to
eliminate confusion for the user
The solution should clearly define
specific terminologies so that app
language can be fully understood

34. 24
The HCD tool for App development aim:
The aim of the criteria is to fulfill each one so that the developer finds value in the tool that is
being created. The criteria listed below are listed in order of hierarchy, which is derived from
the combination of primary and secondary research.
The HCD tool for App Development should possess the following criteria:
• HCD Process for App Development
The new process of HCD for App Development should minimize the chances for an
app failing, and support the user throughout the process
• Surfacing HCD
The tool should clearly represent the benefits it has for the user and for the product
that is being developed or redeveloped
• Accessibility of the Tool
The tool should be digitally accessible so that it can be accessed at anytime/
anywhere; in time of need, assistance, or being a new user
• Interactive Usability
The tool should minimize the time spent on developing an application, and in the
end should provide a clear understanding of how to move forward
• Avoid Misinterpretation
The tool should differentiate between apps that fail and apps that succeed to avoid
confusion. This can then provide the user with the sense of security, value, and
understanding of the overall process
• Platform Differentiation (ex: Apple vs. Android)
The tool should minimize or eliminate any confusion for the user, by clearly
differentiating between platforms
• Simplistic Terminology
The process, within the tool, should be created with simple language so that it can be
understood by the majority, and not solely by developers
7. Criteria
7.1 Defining Criteria

35. 25
In addition, the tool, if possible, should possess the following additional criteria:
• Easily Updatable
The tool should take into account the constant change in platform technologies,
which in turn means it should be capable of being easily altered to remain
relevant and meet the needs of the user
Measuring the criteria will not only include the author, but as well the user’s (App Develop-
ers and App Creators) whom the tool will be created for. This rating will provide further in-
sights and feedback in order to implement changes for future concepts. To ensure the criteria
are being properly measured, each criteria will need to be rated by at least one App Develop-
er, App Creator, and Author. By using this system of measurement, as seen below in Tool for
Measuring and Analyzing Criteria, it can assist in asking follow up questions. For example:
You rated Surface the Benefits of App Development a 3, How can we enhance this so that you
can better see and understand the benefits? With this type of elementary questioning, new
ideas and user interests can surface and can further be integrated into the final solution.
7.2 Measurements for Criteria
The table on the right is used to guide the
app developers, app creators, and author,
in order for them to attach a definition to
the amount being selected. This will assist
the author to analyze explicitly what a giv-
en number represents, in association with
the criteria, and can then be properly meas-
ured. From the rating the applicant will
need to choose the measurement that best
fits for the selected criteria in order to re-
ceive accurate measurements and for the
author to validate measured concepts.
Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Criteria
Table 2. “Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Criteria”, Created by Mitchel Böhi
System for Measuring Criteria
Figure 8. “System for Measuring Criteria”,
Created by Mitchel Böhi
APP DEVELOPERS APP CREATORS AUTHOR RATING TOTAL
Digital Tool
HCD Process
1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5
14
12
3 - 15
RATING GUIDE FOR
MEASURING CRITERIA
5 - Fully Fulfilled
4 - Mostly Fulfilled
3 - Half Fulfilled
2 - Semi-Fulfilled
1 - Unfulfilled

36. 26
The following interviews took place through email, phone, and questionaires which helped
clarify specific items before concept generation could begin. It is important to note that in-
terviewees were not gender selected, the author contacted firms and the individuals whom
replied were the ones selected below. For the sake of space, and ease of viewing, the full ques-
tionaires that have been conducted can be found in Appendix E.
Julian Weber
CEO / Developer
Konstantin Bukin
Project Manager of Development
Michael Schranz
Head of Business Development
David Greminger
Managing Partner / Software Engineer
Daniel Racsko
Co-Founder / Director
Fabian Spring
Developer
8.1 Interviews with Professionals (Developers)
8. Research Plan
In order to recapitulate where this project began, it is important to reinstate the initial goal of
the research question, How may integrating a human-centered design approach enhance the
development of mobile applications? Although from secondary research, facts and figures
have assisted in answering the broader context of the research question, the needs and be-
haviours of an app developer should be further analyzed through primary research. The aim
of primary research is to surface developer needs and behaviors, the working environment,
tools which are being used, artifacts that are being interacted with on a daily basis, and over-
all to understand how a day in the life of an app developer’s world looks like.
To analyze these areas of interest specific methods should be set in place and used to synthe-
sis how the solution can be the most optimal fit for the developer. The methods which will be
integrated are derived from ethnographic research, and are stated as follows:
• Interviews with Professionals
These interviews should be a combination of survey questionnaires and personal
communication (interaction with developers).
• Day in the Life
Spending a day in a developers world, on location, should assist in not only answer-
ing questions, but simultaneously observing how developers work, interact with
tools, communicate with one another, and which artifacts are being used.

37. 27
In order to understand the target users (developers), which the tool is being created for, eth-
nographic research needed to be utilized. Spending a day at 1up GmbH, with two software
developers; David Greminger and Jim Schmid, assisted in observing developers in the most
natural atmosphere; their workspace. The insights and observations that were taken from this
are as followed: Developers work in a quiet environment, the only noise they interact with
is a phone call from a client, music, and communication with other developer. Schmid was
coding, and Greminger pointed out that “there is never only one way to come to the same
solution, it is about choosing what code is the right method to solve the overall problem”.
Although they have many books for coding, 99% of the time Google search is more efficient to
come to a coding answer. When asked if they could use a tool to incorporate the human into
what is being developed they both agreed that a tool could be very useful if done right. Latter
finding out that a tool could be anything except video tutorials, because as Schmid stated, “if
I watch a video it tells me that I have to learn at the speed that it is playing, whereas if I could
read at my own pace, I could grasp the meaning of the task or steps, making it more efficient
for my understanding”. Both developers clarified that if a process was being incorporated
into the tool, it should have a beautiful overview, one step per page, and a downloadable pdf.
8.2 A Day in the Life
A Day in the Life of a Developer
Figure 9. “A Day in the Life with D. Greminger & J. Schmid”, Photos by Mitchel Böhi

38. 28
DEVELOP
9. Ideation
9.1 Process Combination
Figure 10. “The working process for ideation”, Created by Mitchel Böhi, on April 4, 2015
The process seen below is a combination of the Human-centered Design process from IDEO,
existing app development processes, and insights from section 8.2 A Day in the Life. This
will be used as a working process, which will be implemented within the development of
the coming concepts. It is important to note that the steps being represented in figure 10 are
only the main steps of the process, and between each step, represented by arrows, there are
multiple sub-steps that assist in guiding the user. As mentioned, this is a working process,
meaning that it is subject to alterations based on user-feedback during the phase of prototype
testing. The goal for this process is to clearly define each step so that it is intuitive for the user,
and can be used by app creators and app developers alike. Furthermore, the complexity of
the process will be broken into steps and phases, which may assist the creators and develop-
ers through a seamless journey. In the end, the user must find value in what is being present-
ed and in order to communicate this value, a design management approach will enhance the
overall solution.
To best manage this process, the testing of each step will take place by using the actual step
and adding to, or elimintating from the process when necessary. Each step should guide the
user to the following step without any confusion. The questions that will be associated within
the steps should help the user to surface important aspects that were either previously not
thought of, or in turn could become new knowledge. The overall goal for managing this pro-
cess carefully should enhance the useability, while simultaneously eliminating pain points
for the user, as well as mistakes or errors that arise. The creation of the combined working
process, developed by the author, can be seen in Appendix H.
The Working Process for Ideation

39. 29
9.2 Creating Concepts
The creation of concepts is heavily impacted by the previously mentioned criteria. Yet, to
fulfill the criteria and to surface value within the concepts, pushing the boundaries and im-
agining great ideas will guide the creation of the concepts that will be delivered. “The Fact
that imagination is the pristine power of the human mind has long been recognized by the
greatest thinkers” (Osborn, 2013). Creating these concepts should show creativity and imagi-
nation and should only be limited by the criteria that has been associated. Moreover, to guide
the generating of concepts the following project statement will be placed at the forefront to
keep the focus and the overall goal at the center of everything being created.
Project Statement
Develop a tool that integrates a human-centered design approach for app development, which
current and future app developers/creators could use to minimize, or at best, eliminate the
chance of app failure in the market. This tool should incorporate all previously mentioned
criteria in order to fulfill the needs of app developers and furthermore, for these developers
to find value in using a human-centered design approach through the tool being presented.
In order to best fulfill the objective of this project, the creation of concepts will take into
account each goal, strategy, and facet listed below:
• Findings from research should be integrated into the tool
• Facts that have been surfaced should guide the process of developing a tool
• Criteria should be implemented for the tool to fulfill the needs of the developer(s)
• Criteria should be measured to discover what concept fits best to meet the given criteria
• Concepts should differ in that they all incorporate different, yet specific benefits
• Equal importance should be provided to HCD, The Market, and App Developers
• The tool should support the mission of the research question
• The tool should be able to be used and function in accordance with criteria
• The tool should implement insights gained from ethnographic research
• The solution should fulfill the project statement and be useable

40. To create this concept, the tool Justinmind was used by contacting the CEO and gaining full
access to the rights of use. The communication between the author and Xavier Portet - CEO
of Justinmind can be found in Appendix I.
Creating a web-based app was a helpful start to finding out what information was most im-
portant to the user. As seen in figure 11 below, the largest screen is the home screen, where the
user can choose to view what he or she is looking for based on the item selected. Although
in concept generation there is not always a need to place high importance on design, in this
case design helped to manage the UI. This will assist in deciphering between screenshots for
the future measurements of criteria between app developers, app creators, and the author.
A web-based application was chosen, because it cannot only fulfill a majori-
ty of the criteria, but it also encourages on-the-go interaction with a team. The is-
sue that lies within an app is the size of the screen when trying to follow a process.
Interaction is limited to chatting within the app, but is not able to use a mobile
devices native functionality; which is due to the fact that it is ran through a website.
30
9.3 Concept 1 - The App
Figure 11. “The App Concept”, Created by Mitchel Böhi
The App

41. 31
9.4 Concept 2 - The Website
The creation of this concept assisted in a better understanding for the path of the user, while
at the same time surfaced features and new ideas that could be further developed. In this con-
cept, having a much larger screen than concept 1, it became apparent that the need for screen
space and the different techniques in representing the process could be better enhanced.
Furthermore, a website can also be a responsive design solution, which is capable of function-
ing on many devices, such as desktops, tablets, and smartphones. A website is also capable
of fulfilling the additional criteria of being Easily Updatable, which is a helpful aspect when
considering user feedback and being able to integrate and alter based on the needs of the user.
As seen in figure 12, the tool uses colors to create connections and guidance, this assists in
having little to no confusion when using the tool, and moreover that each color is associated
with a step, process, or used as a guide for the developer and creator alike. Although devel-
oping a website is a complex task, it has the potential to be the most valuable means for a tool
that a user can interact with and furthermore find value in using. To view the original concept
2 sketches, please see Appendix J.
Figure 12. “The Website Concept”, Created by Mitchel Böhi
The Website

42. 32
9.5 Concept 3 - The Digital Book
Figure 13. “The Digital Book Concept”, Created by Mitchel Böhi
In this concept the goal is to best display information so that it can be read in a simple
language and be understood by the majority of individuals who aim to create or develop
an application. The aim of concept 3 is to not only factor in the criteria, but to make it an
interactive, digital book, which can be used on technology equipped devices. This concept
was developed because from interviews it showed that printed means (concept 3 can also be
printed), was one of the sources of interest for developers; as seen in section 8.2. The issue
that arises with a printed source is that it lacks the interactive useability that a digital source
encaptures. The digital book could be used on the go, by signing into Amazon, iTunes, or an-
other source that offers digital publishing, and could be downloaded directly to the device;
which entails that it would need no Internet access. It is also easily adaptable, and could
clearly represent the benefits of the HCD process, while at the same time guide the user. Sim-
ilar to concept 2, the book could also be seperated by chapters, colors, icons, and titles which
may avoid misinterpretation and clearly differentiate between platforms; such as Windows,
Android, Apple (iOS), and Blackberry.
The Digital Book

43. 33
9.6 Measure Concepts and Create Prototypes
Measure Concepts
As mentioned in section 7.2, to best measure the concepts an app developer, app creator, and
the author would place a value on each criteria. The results of measuring the three previously
mentioned concepts are displayed in the tables below.
Table 3. Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 1, by Mitchel Böhi
Table 4. Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 2, by Mitchel Böhi
APP DEVELOPERS APP CREATORS AUTHOR RATING TOTAL
HCD Process
Surfacing HCD
1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5
9
6
3 - 15
CONCEPT 1
Accessibility
Interactive
Useability
Avoid Mis-
interpretation
Platform
Differentiation
Simplistic
Terminology
Easily
Updatable
13
10
13
4
14
9
APP DEVELOPERS APP CREATORS AUTHOR RATING TOTAL
HCD Process
Surfacing HCD
1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5
14
13
3 - 15
CONCEPT 2
Accessibility
Interactive
Useability
Avoid Mis-
interpretation
Platform
Differentiation
Simplistic
Terminology
Easily
Updatable
15
12
12
7
13
13

44. 34
Table 5. Completed Measurements from Criteria - Concept 3, by Mitchel Böhi
The process of measurement, as seen in Tables 3,4, and 5, was used to conceptualize what
came about from insights, findings, and criteria. The strong correlation between measuring
and creating is due to the fact that measurements can surface not only future needs of the
user, but likewise, what still needs improvement, and where hierarchy is placed based on the
derived criteria. Measuring is known to be “the fundamental basis for all research, design,
and development...” (Habib, n.d.), and with these measurements the goal is to take what has
been most, as well as least impactful and translate these understandings into well-developed
prototypes.
In conclusion, it can be seen that the concept which best fulfills the criteria is concept 2 - The
Website. Although there is a spread in values placed on specific criteria, the overall total
of each concept weighed in as follows: Concept 1: 78/120, Concept 2: 99/120, and Concept
3: 80/120. Given the fact that in some cases specific criteria have a lower rating, such as in
Concept 2, Platform Differentiation, the prototypes should focus highly on enhancing these
criteria by developing based on how to better differentiate between specific platforms. Fur-
thermore, the challenge from concept to prototype is not only to maintain all criteria require-
ments, but also to manage the criteria in order to best suit the users needs. The measured
criteria will set the outline for the features developed within the tool. These features should
accomadate the user needs and furthermore compliment the given criteria. Now that con-
cepts have been created and measured, the aim is to create functioning prototypes that can
be shared with developers in order to gain further insights and feedback which may then
enhance the development and creation of a final solution for app developers and creators.
APP DEVELOPERS APP CREATORS AUTHOR RATING TOTAL
HCD Process
Surfacing HCD
1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5
12
10
3 - 15
CONCEPT 3
Accessibility
Interactive
Useability
Avoid Mis-
interpretation
Platform
Differentiation
Simplistic
Terminology
Easily
Updatable
9
9
13
6
15
6

45. 35
Create Prototypes
Prototype 1 (P1), also using the Justinmind program, is an interactive prototype that may be
tested by not only the author but as well a developer. P1 assisted in understanding the com-
plexity of developing a working prototype, as well as the detail and time combined which
is required to create a website. From this prototype two major things surfaced, namely; the
amount of information that needed to be added from syphoning through research, as well as
the amount of steps (pages) needed to represent the process in an effective manner. As criteria
3 states; Accessibility of the Tool, and as the tool will be a website based on criteria meas-
urements, the website should incorporate responsive design - which entails accessibility on
smartphones, tablets, desktops and laptop computers, in order to fulfill the criteria. To have
a more in-depth view of Prototype 1, please see Appendix K.
Figure 14. Prototype One (P1), by Mitchel Böhi
Figure 15. Prototype Two (P2), by
Mitchel Böhi
Figure 16. Flat vs Skeuomorphism, by
Mitchel Böhi
Prototype 2 (P2), was created with the combina-
tion of Adobe Suite and www.wix.com - a web-
based portal for creating websites. What came
from creating this prototype was the combina-
tion of both Flat Design and Skeuomorphic, as
seen in Figure 15. As Wells Riley, the founder of
Hack Design argues, “flat design has allowed
digital designers to brush the slate clean in
terms of how they approach their work, but it
has also hindered a sense of wonder and whim-
sy” (Brownlee, 2014). With this in mind, and
what will come of design in the future, a com-
bination of flat and skeuomorphic design will
be used to enhance the overall appearance and
furthermore, the functionality that not only the
website, but also the process should incorporate.
Prototype One
Prototype Two
Flat vs Skeuomorphism

46. 36
Figure 18. Measuring with Developers, by Mitchel Böhi
From prototype testing the following points were mentioned, and then clustered to better
enhance the useability and understanding of what should be incoprorated in the tool that
is being created. The number associated with the cluster is derived from the pictures below.
In order to develop a tool that
will best suit the needs of the end-
user a spider diagram was created
and filled out with Greminger and
Schmid at 1up GmbH. This was
done to pin-point the strong and
weak characteristics of the present-
ed prototypes. The results from this
diagram should be incorporated
into the final solution. Furthermore,
the points listed above (1,2 and 3)
will also need to remain in focus
when developing the final solution.
Figure 17. Prototype Testing with D. Greminger & J. Schmid, by Mitchel Böhi
Spider Diagram for Prototype Testing
Prototype Testing at 1up GmbH
1 2 3
• When there are more than
three steps, scrolling is too
cumbersome (page steps)
• It must be responsive
design, as everything now-
adays is working on all
types of digital means
• Understandable descrip-
tions of each step is the
most helpful guide
• Provide an example of how
each steps works to mini-
mize the confusion for the
developer
• A beautiful overview of
the process is good, but it
needs to be broken down
into steps that can be
choosen based on the
preference of the developer
using the tool
1 2 3
10. Prototype Testing
10.1 Feedback and Insights
5 4 3 2 1 0
DESIGN
THE
PROCESS
ACCESSIBILITY
OF THE TOOL
INTERACTIVE
USABILITY
AVOID
MISINTERPRETATION
PLATFORM
DIFFERENTIATION
SIMPLISTIC
TERMIN-
OLOGY
PROTOTYPE 1 PROTOTYPE 2
COLOR SCHEME

47. 37
11. Managing the Design
11.1 Combine to Create
Figure 20. Prototype Testing: Insights to Final Prototyping, by Mitchel Böhi
The figure above was created to properly manage the design process and decisions that were
being made, as well as to assist in deciphering what phase must be completed before moving
forward. From ideation to concept generation and further on to testing the created prototypes
with real developers, feedback was collected and new insights were discovered. The design
process for this thesis is a constant iteration, in order to acquire the necessary information
to come to the best possible result. The criteria (section 7) combined with the testing of real
users (sections 8.1, 8.2 and 10) were conducted in order to validate the prototypes, which
could then be combined and altered to create the final prototype. In the study of Design
Management, testing the prototypes and moving directly to refining and building the solution
is an efficient and effective method, yet when working with digital means and actual users, a
second phase of testing the final prototype may bring deeper insights and a more enhanced
understanding for the final solution. As the final solution must be fully understood, with no
misinterpreted information, the phase of Combine to Create was developed to validate the
final prototype and from there, the final solution. A website layout, design, and functionality
need to be thoroughly thought out before development should begin. For this reason the fol-
lowing phase aims to assist in surfacing all aspects before the development process begins.
Figure 19. The Stages of Development, by Mitchel Böhi
The Stages of Development
Insights to Final Prototyping
IDEATION
PROCESS
COMBINATION
CREATING
CONCEPTS
MEASURING
CONCEPTS
CREATING
PROTOTYPES
TESTING
PROTOTYPES
INTEGRATING
FEEDBACK
& INSIGHTS