Taking time out of an IT career presents a huge challenge given the pace of change in the sector. Development tools and practices are constantly evolving and so too are careers. I was taking part in a course aimed at women who were interested in returning to the workforce. One feature of the course was a series of seminars of women speaking about their roles in IT. One in particular spoke about her experience in a UX/UI consultancy. This was a relatively new term to me but had shades of what we used to describe as Information Architecture, Usability and Accessibility which were all areas that I had been interested in but were often overlooked in the rush of the fast moving consumer websites that I had worked on. I loved the idea of taking the time at this stage of the product lifecycle to make sure that you are actually creating something with the users needs in mind and not what the Project Manager or Developer thinks they need. I began to think that a sideways shift from frontend development to UI/UX would be a perfect path to working in IT again.

I enrolled in a User Experience Postgraduate course in IADT to gain more insight and exposure to this field. The course was very much project based in a group setting but supplemented with lectures at every key phase of the process. The core of the course was to select a digital interaction that we’ve experienced and believed could be improved on to provide a better experience. This interaction then formed the basis of our studies. Therefore, as our knowledge increased we applied methodologies and research to our core interaction. I selected the Tesco mobile app for online grocery shopping. I had just returned from the UK where online grocery shopping is ubiquitous yet it didn’t seem to be the case in Ireland. I was also finding that I wasn’t using the service as much as I had previously when I lived abroad. Having tried a number of apps, I wondered was it the user experience that was not encouraging me to be a return user or was it more due to market and cultural differences.

A paper in Research and Empathy in Human-centered Design was our first deliverable. We began by learning how to formulate a Problem statement. This was followed by exploratory research, Proto personas, online questionnaires, observations and interviews and the subsequent analysis of the data collected. We used two tasks for observations. The first was for the participant to book a specific delivery slot. The second was to create a shopping list based on a set of instructions. This User Research formed a huge proportion of the findings.

The findings of this research were then used to refine the Personas we had created at an earlier stage. This research culminated in two Job Stories that illustrated solid scenarios for further research. These scenarios were depicted in As Is and To Be Scenarios providing a compelling argument for further research. The first Job Story was to successfully book a delivery slot. The second as illustrated below is to find grocery products to add to an online shopping basket.

A paper in Human-centered Design, Prototyping and Evaluation was the next assignment. This began with an objective review of the selected Job Stories from the earlier paper. What was perceived to be the more straightforward task of selecting a delivery slot, was proving to be more challenging than expected. A smaller hallway research study was conducted to investigate further and the results were surprising in that over 50% of participants abandoned the task of booking a delivery slot. See the illustration below for more details.

Confident that a serious issue had been identified a Problem Statement and Design Challenge were framed.

A substantial review of mobile design principles was carried out and applied in initial paper prototyping pilot studies. These were further modified through context design research and design charettes to ultimately create 2 designs for a Paper Protoype Study. The study was carried out with 4 participants using the Human Computer method. It was video recorded and documented the user performing the task with both designs. See below for a video recording of a participant using what was ultimately the preferred design.

The study collected some quantitative data for comparison purposes and qualitative data in the form of a semi structured interview. The findings were then used to create the next iteration of task screens

If you are interested in learning more about this project, both papers are available here

• Research and Empathy in Human-centered Design
• Human-centered Design, Prototyping and Evaluation

Learnings
There were a huge amount of learnings in this course. The importance of research in the design process cannot be underestimated. We are all subject to bias and the only way to design for the human interaction is research and iterate. Always listen to what the participant is saying, choose your words carefully and empathically, and never try to defend choices. Practically, being prepared for observations is absolutely key to success. Fully charged equipment, extra supplies, additional recording devices can be the difference to the success of an observation or interview.

Reflections
Achieving an A grade was a huge confidence boost. In addition, the academic institution have since asked if they could use some of my assignments as examples to incoming students which is a great seal of approval. I found the content both intriguing and inspiring. We all have frustrating digital interactions and we possibly don’t remember the good ones. But every so often we have a digital experience and might remark on how it it surprisingly simple it was. I believe that this is a result of excellent user and design research and would hope to someday be part of that process