Today, welcome to the \
Not just you. Experienced researchers and designers may also hesitate to conduct in-depth research projects and find it difficult to integrate into the rapidly changing innovation environment. Fortunately, much less time and cost is spent online, and there is an explosion of amazing tools to help start (or expand) design research. But don’t give up direct investigation. In your process, the time and place will come when you still want to do it. But sometimes lightness is more appropriate. In this article, we will provide you with five big reasons. You need to conduct more relaxed research to avoid making you feel like you are playing tricks. The
1. the research tool suite should be diverse. As the saying goes, \
UX designers who first come into contact with research will inevitably feel excited when facing users. However, as in all areas, senior staff know how to use various tools. A good MVP research tool suite can include: In depth interview (face-to-face and remote) face-to-face usability research questionnaire survey remote usability research (adjustment and adjustment) pulse Survey (such as NPs). Understanding how to design and perform different types of research using different methodologies is an important part of building efficient and effective research practices. 2. according to the selection of tools suitable for the task, suppose you know how to use all the tools in the toolkit, and how to know when and which tools should be used? The
OK, the first shot is to check which part of the double diamond. The double diamond of Design Council UK is a useful and high-level diagram of the two big steps we call \
In the solution space, we are testing some official ideas that may help solve these customer problems. Evaluation studies (usability tests, impulse questionnaires, tree tests, and other responses to the designed Toolkit) are distributed here. The second one we used
The lens is the fidelity of creativity. For low enrichment ideas, they may become more specific as in-depth and extensive access becomes more appropriate, and the ideas are carried out in a high enrichment solution. It is worth mentioning that we have found and verified a wider range of user problems, and used the unadjusted availability test in future higher enrichment design iterations. The test now focuses on the details of the solution. The
In order to determine whether the research tool is appropriate, the third lens used is the danger lens. For example, sometimes, if your solution makes little effort explicitly and decisively, you don’t have to spend much time exploring customer problems. For example, if the problem of error repair is clear and the solution is clear, there is no need to conduct in-depth interviews with users. Male 3 Please recheck the remaining families. As long as we, as designers and researchers, want to eliminate families while developing ideas, we must not completely eliminate risks. In addition, because only complete information is required, the team may be delayed when the forest build measure learn cycle is more appropriate. The
When you begin to consider starting tasks in a productive manner at the end of the solution development process, you may find that some new assumptions will be infiltrated during the iterative process of design and implementation. As new people join the project, new ideas and explanations for various decisions are intertwined. Rather than controlling the solution generation of the design and research teams, it is better to allow the opinions of different team members, but please ensure that all parts of the solution that collect your assumptions are tested before publishing. In particular, if there is a risk of wrong design assumptions, the efficiency of the solution may be reduced. The
For example, if part of the implementation means that the same layout as the previous iteration test cannot be used, perform a quick remote unadjusted availability test on the usabilityhub based on the screenshot of the local development environment, and confirm again. That is, the target user can still achieve the goal. Compared with arbitrary behavior, the mechanical relationship of cross functional groups is much easier and better. However, it will not replace the previous research conducted to develop the solution from the beginning. Another example is using tables to structure information. This article explores the value of audible. The
4. in order to repeat quickly, the short feedback loop is very important if the team wants to seamlessly integrate the research into the workflow. Not all studies have short feedback loops. Some longitudinal studies may take weeks or months to collect data, even before synthesis begins. From the problem space to the solution space, with the advancement of the process, the feedback loop is shorter and the repetition is faster. Usually, in the initial stage, we will spend more time talking, deeply understand the data, and carefully consider the significance of the work. However, when you enter the solution space, these feedback loops speed up, and you can test multiple ideas and learn faster. The
At the end of the process, we sometimes run research rounds too quickly, and the results are immediately integrated into the design iteration by the developer. At this point, it may be reasonable for developers to participate in research in order to gain insight as soon as possible! We really like to use unadjusted research at this stage. When we reach the finish line, in order to maintain the laser focus, we run short and sharp tests (rather than long and in-depth tests). At the beginning of the process, it is less likely to run at the same speed, and other methods and tools are more suitable. 5. to improve flexibility and reach more participants, we began to use more remote research without arbitration. A big reason is that it helps to diversify the pool of participants. In order to participate in some remote coordination tests,
