SECTOR: Information Technology, Consulting, Government, Cloud Computing
DURATION: 6 months
MY ROLE: UX Strategist, User Researcher, Information Architecture, UX Designer
CHALLENGE: There was a large cost of time and funding to the initial set up of virtual environments detrimental to project deployment.
GOAL: Create a system that would allow users to quickly configure, evaluate cost and set up a virtual environment.
RETURN ON INVESTMENT: Reducing the effort to set up a virtual machine would reduce the initial required cost for developing and time for implementing a virtual environment. This represented a selling point to add into future contracts.
ACTIVITIES PERFORMED: UX plan, UX strategy, user research, UX requirements, personas, user journey, information architecture, wireframe, prototype, and design review
DESCRIPTION: This project was a marketing effort meant to assist with the cost analysis and deployment of virtual environments. As the lead UX designer I made recommendations about UX activities, integration with development and timeline for completed the UX activities.
I had initial meeting with team which consisted of a project manager, front-end developer, and several back-end developer.
I recommended that the team bring in a graphic designer for any visually complex components such as infographics.
The team discussed goals of the project and timeline for work to be completed. I determined the UX plan integration with development, listing out the expected deliverables and timeline for completion. Additionally, I organized and conducted design reviews as needed to create clear communication with the team and a cohesive understanding of the system.
I recommended conducting user research in the form interviews to define the user needs as a persona, developing UX requirements from synthesis, deriving a user journey to structure the content as an information architecture, creating wireframes to reflect user actions and a prototype to demonstrate the experience.
I additionally recommended conducting usability testing and was notified it was not scoped for this project.
Outcome: UX strategy was used to create a UX plan.
I started by working with the project manager to identify the criteria for the targeted user. I identified individuals who fit the ideal user and subject matter experts familiar with configuring cloud computing. I organized interviews around 4 individuals with backgrounds in project management, dev ops and back-end development.
I conducted user interviews with 4 people in-person. The interviews were structured with a questionnaire about experience with cloud computing and informal where we identified the information needed to set up different types of environments. The preferred tool for the informal discussion was a whiteboard. The whiteboard allowed us to list out the environments, identify it’s components and diagram out the different types of environments.
Since I entered this project with an unbiased point of view about cloud computing it was essential for me to conducted reoccurring interviews to deepen my understanding of the user needs. Additionally, I conducted a competitive analysis between AWS and Azure. I identified functionality, feature gaps and costs.
Outcome: I determined the user, theirs needs and aspects of cloud computing.
After conducting my research I synthesis the information into a set of UX requirements, personas and user journeys.
The UX requirements were used to communicate the user needs as actionable tasks the development build. Personas were valuable to the team because they communicated who the users of the system were and their goals. The user journey were used to explain to the team the steps the user would use to accomplish their goals.
It was at this point that I conducted design reviews. Each design review was an opportunity for the team to offer input about how the finding would affect their development. I find it important when conducting design reviews to focus on one deliverable or a few features at a time. Offering too much information may lead to a topic not receiving the depth of discussion necessary to make a decisive decision.
After sharing my findings I realized that I hadn’t planned to conduct a competitive analysis. As a result, I keep it as a part of my notes when It would have been helpful to share with the team.
Outcome: I was able to create UX requirements, personas, and user journeys.
After I received feedback from the team I created an information architecture based on the user journeys. The information architecture represent the structure of the pages in the application. I used that structure, along with UX requirements, to create mid-high level wireframes. I used the wireframes to create prototypes of flows that needed further discussion or clearer explanation.
The team took my recommendation to bring in a visual designer in a limited compacity to create a style guide canvas that included fonts, color pallets, iconography, etc. I used this information to create elements such as buttons, form fields and other elements.
Based on the findings I was able to determine a minimalized set of information that would be required configure several environments sharing common elements. I design the pages for home, detailed information, profile, search, history, the form wizard we used to process the configuration, and other pages to support the functionality.
All the content went through a design review with the team which validated iterative modifications.
Outcome: Information architecture, wireframes, and prototypes.
Ultimately this project wasn’t scoped for testing. This was known at the beginning of the process.
However, I always recommend validating with users. In an ideal process usability testing is essential to the design cycle. It acts as a validation of the design with users, triggering the iteration process. When creating a test script I recommend keeping the questions limited to reviewing a small set of content, features or flows. This will ensure the results aren’t bias by fatigue and the primacy effect.
In some cases like this project it is important to be creative when getting user input.
I performed gorilla style testing by meeting with the subject matter experts and asked for their opinions about page design or implementation of features. As a result, findings remain part of my private notes and recommendations were immediately implemented.
Outcome: I gathered informal research finding from validating the design with the subject matter experts.
The project concluded when the development team launched the application for internal use. Other internal teams used the application to configure cloud environments on other projects. I stay on the project in an advisory role to make recommendations that occurred as a result of limitation discovered during the development process.
In retrospect, I would have wanted to spend more time conducting research to bridge the gap between my knowledge base and the subject matter experts. The customer for this project was also the project manager. As a result, it was easy to get feedback with a short turn around.
There was pressure to produce results which created a level of tension between the project manager and myself. The project manager wanted to ensure that the project stayed on schedule, while I wanted to ensure we create a meaningful application for the user. The designer in me acknowledged that relying on the expertise of others and usability testing was more important than my personal understanding. The strategist in me recognized the need to produce was more important than continued research.
Ultimately, I found this project to be a great opportunity to learn information which I had little previous exposure. I learned how to design for a concept with little technical knowledge, utilizing best practices and subject matter experts in lieu of my own experience.