Hide menu

TDDD03 Industrial Engineering and Systems Usability Issues

Project


You can find the project case to work with in this PDF.

Aim

In this course, we will focus on goal- and effect-oriented design approaches to software development and look at the issues of cost and benefits (return on investment, ROI) of such an approach. We will also look into the balance between quality and cost when conducting user-centred IS/IT aquisitions and development. The goal of the project is to get acquainted with the different parts of a goal-/effect-oriented design process, and also to practice the measuring of usability, and show that you understand the value and effects of usability for individuals and organisations.

You will carry out a project where you identify and define the effect goals and relevant measurement points of a consumer-oriented service provided via a website. You will also identify the main target groups of this service, and carry out user evaluations with representative end users, and write an informal test report. Based on your findings, you will provide suggestions for improvements of the online service. Finally, you will analyse you the impact of suggested improvements in relation to effect goals and measurement points from a ROI (Return on Investment) and CBA (Cost-Benefit Analysis) perspective. You could also, if appropriate, make use of other models like TCO (Total Cost of Ownership), BSC (Balanced Scorecard), and/or Kano Analysis.

Please note! The project starts immediately, and the course leader will therefore at the introductory lecture form groups. The project is performed in groups of 5 students.

The product is carried out in the following three steps:

Step 1: Identifying the purpose and goal of the service

  • Identification and definition of effect goals for the website
  • Identification and definition of relevant measurement points for each effect goal
  • Identification and definition of persona hypothesis for the service
Lectures
  • Introductory lecture 15/1 13:15 - 15:00, by Jenny Johansson.
  • Lecture on Goal-Directed Design and Procurement of Usable Systems, 15/1 15:15 - 17:00, by Jenny Johansson.
  • Guest lecture by Dr. Gavin Melles from Swinburne University in Melbourne, AU on Design Thinking, 22/1 13:15 - 15:00.
Literature

To find and get access to Pruitt & Grudin (2003) you may need to go through the university library to the ACM Digital Library database and then search out the article.

Group deliverable (mandatory)

A report consisting of 3-5 A4 pages (pdf-format) in which you describe the effect goals, the measurement points and the persona hypothesis that the group has identified for the service, as well as how the group has arrived at these. The reasoning should reflect and be connected to the literature for step 1.

Deadline at seminar 1.

Individual deliverable (optional for 10 extra points to the take-home exam)

A short report (2-3 A4 pages in pdf format) in which you analyse the effect goals, measurement points and persona hypotheses that the group has chosen, and discuss which implications this will have for the future steps of the project work and the service as a whole. Examples of issues to discuss: In what way would other effect goals change the direction of the project? Which risks can be seen when focusing on the chosen effect goals? How would a different target group affect the service?

Your reasoning should be closely tied to the literature for step 1, and focus on analysis and discussion rather than simply describing what you did in the group work (which is the focus for the group deliverable).

Deadline 1 week after seminar 1 is the same as the deadline for the take-home exam. Deadline for the delivery of the completed take-home exam is 16th of march at midnight [this information was updated Feb. 18 2013].

Step 2: User evaluations

  • Prepare a relevant test protocol for user evaluations of the service based on the identified effect goals and main target user groups
  • Recruit representative participants based on your persona hypothesis
  • Conduct user evaluations of the service with at least one participant/group member (i.e. a minimum of 5 participants)
  • Write up the results in an informal test report
  • Lectures
    • Lecture on Methods and Tools for User-Centred Design and Usability Evaluations, 28/1 8.15 - 10.00, by Mattias Arvola.
    Literature

    To find and get access to Nørgaard & Hornbæk (2006) you may need to go through the university library to the ACM Digital Library database and then search out the article.

    Group deliverable (mandatory)

    An informal test report (use the templates found at usability.gov), which describes the process and main results from the user evaluations. As an appendix you should also include the test protocol used for the tests.

    Deadline at seminar 2.

    Individual deliverable (optional for 10 extra points to the take-home exam)

    A short report (2-3 A4 pages in pdf format) in which you analyse and discuss the results from the user tests, and the process used to obtain them. Examples of issues to discuss: How valid are the results? How reliable are the results? Which other measurements or evaluations would be relevant to use in order to strengthen the validity and reliability? How relevant are the test results in relation to the effect goals that the group has set up for the service?

    Your reasoning should be closely tied to the literature for step 2, and focus on analysis and discussion rather than simply describing what you did in the group work.

    Deadline 1 week after seminar 2.

    Step 3: Suggesting improvements and analysing the ROI of these

  • Identify and present improvements to the service in accordance to the findings from the user evaluations
  • Describe how these improvements would bring the service closer to obtaining its effect goals
  • Use appropriate economic models (ROI, CBA, TCO, BSC, Kano) to provide insight into the economic effects for the service (and its users) if the suggested improvements were implemented. Connect these (when possible) to the measurement points identified in Step 1.
  • Lectures
    • Lecture on Costs and Benefits of Design Work, 11/2 8:15 - 10:00, by Stefan Holmlid.
    • Guest lecture by Karin Ackerholm from InnovationskontorEtt on Effect Mapping and Business Development, 13/2 10:15 - 12:00.
    Literature

    To find and get access to Herman (2004), Jokela (2004), Nørgaard & Hornbæk (2006), Rosenberg (2004), and Turner (2011) you may need to go through the university library website to the ACM Digital Library database and then search out the article. For Donahue you may need to go through the university library website to IEEE xplore database and search out the article.

    Group deliverable (mandatory)

    A report consisting of 3-5 A4 pages (pdf-format) in which you describe suggested improvements of the service based on test results and put in relation to initial effect goals. You shall also use economic models to provide insight into the economic effects for the service and its users if the suggested improvements were implemented. Connect these when possible to the measurement points identified in Step 1. The reasoning should reflect and be connected to the literature for Step 3.

    Deadline at seminar 3.

    Individual deliverable (optional for 10 extra points to the take-home exam)

    A short report (2-3 A4 pages in pdf format) in which you present a plan for further development to move the design of the service closer to desired effects. Examples of issues to include: User value and satisfaction; utility and functionality; business value; branding; positioning etc.

    Your reasoning should tie together the entire group work and suggest a road map for future user-centred development. Literature from all steps is useful.

    Deadline one week after seminar 3.



    Page responsible: Mattias Arvola
    Last updated: 2013-02-18