Pre Research report Datumprikker
Usability research for datumprikker
- CONCEPT -
- VERTROUWELIJK -
Mr. E Wisselink
Mr. Y. Dokov
Mr. M. Blanken
Mr. J Lazaroms
Students of The Hague University
Researcheport Datumprikker
Usability research for datumprikker
Client:
The Hague University
Johanna Westerdijkplein 75
2521 EN Den Haag
Meggie Williams
070-4458707
m.a.williams@hhs.nl
Client:
Webbeat Products BV
Turfschipper 7-9
2292 JC Wateringen
Mr. Geert Merkelbach
06 14790677
Geert@webbeat.nl
Researchers:
Eelco Wisselink
06 284 63 2 29
Yani Dokov
06 190 84 4 84
Micha
06 364 80 2 36
Joerian Lazaroms
06 833 61 3 81
INHOUDSOPGAVE
Introduction
This research is started from the minor Smart Life Rhythms at The Hague University. Students will be doing an usability research of the service ‘’Datumprikker’’. This service provides a service that helps people plan meetings in an structural environment. This helps the user organizing.
Besides that Datumprikker provides a lot of help, it also comes with cons like cooperation in the process. People like using the service for complex and big groups but Datumprikker is too complex for small groups. So the problem Datumprikker is dealing with is probably somewhere an user expercience bottleneck.
THEORY
RESEARCH QUESTION
The question that was provided:
How can we stay in control of our agenda and at the same time make spontaneous catch-up appointments that work?
The question that is researched:
Where are the critical moments while using Datumprikker
METHOD
The methods that were chosen were observation, interviewing and creating a customer journey. The methods came from the book Universal Methods of Design (Martin and Hanington 2012). These methods gave insights of were the bottleneck was of the service design. By interviewing and observation we registered the information of each step the customer was going through.
INSTRUMENT
The interview and observation setting was open. There was a structure by giving the respondent the assignment of organize an meeting with Datumprikker and the other respondent with giving response to that particular meeting. The respondents were also interviewed by other services and the pros of these services. But the order of this was completely open.
In the flow chart showed every step colored with an positive effect on the respondent and an negative.
SAMPELING & RESPONDENTS
For this pre-research we choosed our envirement of friends and family. This is possible since the target group is so big. These respondent were chosen within our personal cycles A-select. The age could be between 18 - 65 with internet experience. The amount of group was 8 respondent because we did a qualitative pre research. But before there was a research with this respondents, we did a research with ourselve so we investigated the steps frustrations.
PROCEDURE
The research took place at an comfort location for the respondent, this could be home. The interview with observation was open for an natural order but had an specific assignment with questions.
There were two assignments, one for the organizer and one for the receiver. The organizer was asked to create an event with the service from Datumprikker. We observed the steps that were taken and asked them to think out loud with every step. There also was investigated with every step what there feeling was. The other assignment procedure went the same but had to give response to an invite from Datumprikker.
As last the respondents were asked about other experiences with other services in similar situations. The focus was at pros of these services so we could investigated there needs.
RESULTS
something about merging the results together.
The results from the research are presented in a customer journey. The experience flow is backed with information of thoughts and feelings. The alternative used methods are listed and compared feature-wise.
RELIABILITY INSTRUMENT
The research is partly reliable. The customer journey comes with pros and cons but
reliability is not as much of an issue for just gathering info about critical moments.
Customer journey
Pros
Four researchers interpreted, consulted and created as a group the customer journey
There were eight respondent used in this research. This an good amount for an qualitative pre research.
Cons
Alternative used methods to catch up
Pros
Cons
One respons
No one checked the data
GENERAL RESULTS
The general results are shown below.
4.2.1 Customer journey
The critical moments are shown with colors and explained with feelings.
Link:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pSzzKee3elnCaQVw1uZM4Qsjg3Y-lPBRHxBuGM3gsMU/pubhtml?gid=0&single=true
4.2.2 Alternative used methods to catch up
Phone
Used with max 3 people
Pros
Mail
Used with 3 people or more
Pros
Everyone has input:
Consulation about things like, what to do and when. Not just one organizer.
More structured than groupchat
When we meet
Used with small group
Pros
Chats
Used with a small group
Pros
Facebook & LinkedIn
Have no facebook or use it almost not and would not use LinkedIn for these things.
Google Calendar
Small and big group
Pros
You know more about each other left sparetime
It is already integrated with my calendar
100% by the time; there will be no situation where I first say that I am available and later plan something because I forgot about my input.
I don’t need to share my personal data with another organisation
Other users can bring input as well
You can choose your visualization; list, day, week, month and year.
Suggestions for mail addresses.
Quick respond in mail without opening.
Other input
Create your own layout especially for business (look and feel)
Add an attachment
Include also the travel options
If datum prikker would know everyone’s location he could give suggestions about the best location for everyone; make it smart.
No physical appointment? What does everyone prefer? Skype? Hangout?
Communicate with my calendar
Animate; Move answered dates te the left in listview
Animat; Weekview so you got better comparing with you own calendar (or month)
Could be more structured, choose wisely what is the most dominant thing on the webpage.
Everyone can edit.
Show earlier: Respond later
Option to give direct notes
CONCLUSIONS
The initiator finds the biggest problem with picking dates and fill in the e-mail addresses of the participants. The receiver finds the biggest problems to compare his or her agenda with the list of dates. This could be fixed with new dates layout that matches the layout of the agenda instead of the list or by give permission to your agenda and let Datumprikker check your availability. Other pros of methods were that you can start as open as a groupchat like Whatsapp and end as specific as Datumprikker itself. Furthermore Datumprikker isn’t personal and that bothers people aswell.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The first recommendation is further research to discover more of how these new possibilities practically will work out. But the research need to be focused at the steps picking dates, select participants, create an open way of starting an event and a way to make it personal.
REFERENCES
Martin, B., Hanington, B.,(2012) Universal Methods of Design. United States: Rockport
ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHEMNT 1: HARDCOPY DATA RESEARCH
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xpkjNQ7tZI0Ht7DZqaRZmpXswIX3KWvZfa6MoZgPx10/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11F4dsVQqXI3BjFGHXEwvWUVR4xhhXmzr5kKGZoSH0p4/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vBveEQ-8traPIqjldnL0fo0dFNFA_glalRKXE4-U10s/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kOEKKAMXVbFjhN8B74vKZ5PAqo5Mawg0Y6Y30YruQWI/edit?usp=sharing
