Hide menu

TDDD75 Effects-Driven Development and Human-Centred Design of Interactive Systems

Assignment 2 What Wows and What Works?

The mandatory parts must be performed to receive grade 3 on the assignment, and the optional parts are performed for the possibility to receive grade 4 or 5. The work is graded on how well the different methods are performed and integrated, and how well your choices are motivated.

Mandatory parts

Task: This assignment includes the end of the what-if-part of Liedtka's and Ogilve's process outline, as well as the what-wows-part and some of the what-works part.

Procedure:Work is performed in the same groups as in Assignment 1. Break down the assignment into activities and make a time budget with about 40 hours of work per group member. If you note that a group member is not able to contribute to the group work, then you should contact the examiner as soon as possible. You should start from your earlier brainstorming and conduct the following activities by the book (Liedtka & Ogilve, 2010; Adzic, 2012), but adapted wisely to your specific circumstances:

  1. Visualization
  2. Concept Development
  3. Assumption Testing integrated with Impact Mapping
  4. Rapid Prototyping
  5. Customer Co-Creation integrated with Impact Mapping
  6. Learning Launch: gather initial thoughts.
  7. Revisit the discussion of the value-in-use and cost-benefits of your project that you had after the first assignment. Again, make sure to base your discussion on the lectures on those topics and the assigned readings for those lectures.

Please note that one or several of these activities potentially can include research with planning, recruitment of participants (users and stakeholders), gathering of data, and analysis of for example interviews, observations, workshops, and online material. You also need to budget time for preparation of presentation material.

It is a good idea to structure activities so that you switch back and fourth between individual work and group work, e.g. start in full group to coordinate, then work individually or in pairs, still having short regular meetings with the full group to fine-tune plans and catch any problems in the subgroups and then reconvene the full group to synthesize and prepare the next part.

Deadline: The deadline of the mandatory parts is at the second presentation session. Deliverables are handed in in a PDF over email at the end of the presentation session.

The deliverables for Assignment 2 are:

  1. Napkin Pitch (see Liedtka & Ogilve, 2010)
  2. Learning Guide (see Liedtka & Ogilve, 2010)
  3. Time report (see below)
  4. The design presentation (see below)

Time report: The time report should present hours per activity per student. It should have the following format and add up to around 40 hours for every student (the number of hours on activities do not reflect reality in this table):

Name Visualization Concept Development Assumption Testing Rapid Prototyping Customer Co-Creation Learning Launch
Andrea Anderson 7 7 7 7 7 7
Beth Betson 7 7 7 7 7 7
Cliff Clifford 7 7 7 7 7 7
David Davidson 7 7 7 7 7 7
Eve Evenson 7 7 7 7 7 7
Fred Fredricks 7 7 7 7 7 7

Also include a comment on the report that declares if someone has not been able to contribute in major activities or participate in group meetings. State how that person has or will compensate for this. If no compensation could be agreed on, the particular student has to immediately make an arrangement with the supervisor in order to receive a grade on the assignment.

Design presentation: Make a visual 10 minutes presentation (no bullet lists) of both your process and results for the presentation session. Focus on showing what you have done and why, rather than only telling about it. Include the methods you have used, how you have adapted them to your circumstances, and what they resulted in. The examiner will ask how you have integrated impact mapping into the other methods. Cover also your discussion on value in use, and cost and benefits.

The presentation is mandatory, but there are a few valid reasons for missing a presentation. You must then notify your supervisor in advance about why you cannot attend. the supplementary task is to write a description of what you personally did in the group work, and a reflection on lessons learned from the group work (about 800 words). The supplementary tasks should be delivered to your supervisor. Deadlines for re-submissions apply.

Optional parts

For Grade 4: Complete two of the four exercises below. They should be well performed, described in sufficient detail, and analyzed with references to the course literature.

For Grade 5: Complete all four of the exercises below. They should be well performed, described in sufficient detail, and analyzed with references to the course literature, and reach clearly stated conclusions.

There are headings in Liedtka and Ogilve (2010) called "Try This at Home". For Assignment 2 find these headings for Concept Development (pp. 117-119), Assumption Testing (pp. 138-139), Rapid Prototyping (pp. 147-148), and Customer Co-Creation (pp. 165-166). Read and perform the exercises in the book, with the following modifications that have been made in order to fit the course:

  1. Concept Development: Do note that there is a dependency between this exercise and the Brainstorming exercise in Assignment 1. Use the brainstorming results from Assignment 1. On step 5 "Fill in the details", replace the question "How does it benefit my supervisor and colleagues?" with the questions "How does it benefit others around me (family, friends, fellow students)?" If you wish, you may skip the final question "How would it enrich the compact between the firm and me?"
  2. Assumption Testing: No modifications are needed.
  3. Rapid Prototyping: Use the Study Results in the university's Student Portal or some other application or report at a government agency that you have found difficult, as point of departure.
  4. Customer Co-Creation: Focus this exercise on a review of a project work that you have done together with other students. Ellen is another student that also was part of the group.
    • Panel 1: Student with thought bubble: "At the end of the project we should make a review of how we worked as a group, so that we can learn from our experiences. I will ask Ellen to help me."
    • Panel 2: Ellen reading an e-mail with a though bubble:
      • Version 1: "Let me make a summary of what we did, what we accomplished to assist the other student in collecting data."
      • Version 2: "The other student will give me a list of what we did."
      • Version 3: "I will forward this to the rest of the group."
      • Version 4: Other (room for Ellen to fill-in).
    • Panel 3: Student gathering data from the rest of the group and from the teacher:
      • Version 1: Detailed data from three group members.
      • Version 2: High-level data from all group and teacher.
    • Panel 4: Reviewing the feedback:
      • Version 1: A single meeting with written feedback and a discussion.
      • Version 2: Written feedback first then a meeting.
      • Version 3: A pair of meetings, one for feedback and one for future planning.
    • Panel 5: Ellen reflecting on the review process on that student project a year into her professional life after university, with a thought bubble about what it signified for her: "Hmmm, I remember that review. It really taught me ___."

Report: Write a report covering the exercices you have chosen to do. Every exercise should be reported using no more than (approx.) 1000 words and using the following outline:

  1. Procedure and results: Describe in sufficient detail (so that a reader external to the course could understand it) what you did, what happened in the exercise, and what the results were without any evaluation or analysis of it. When appropriate, use figures and photos to illustrate the procedure and results.
  2. Reactions: What were your reactions and thoughts during the exercise (still without any evaluation or analysis)?
  3. Evaluation: What was good or bad about your work, and why was it good or bad? Use references to the course literature when appropriate.
  4. Analysis: Why did you do it the way you did? Why did that make it good or bad? How come? How should you do instead? Use references to the course literature.
  5. General conclusions: What general conclusions can you make based on your experiences and analysis? How could you in the general case make sure that undesirable things do not happen again and desirable things happen every time. Are there alternative approaches that potentially give better results, and if so, why? Use references to the course literature.
  6. Personal conclusions: What concrete conclusions can you personally draw? What are the lessons learned and how would you act in similar situations in the future? How can you make use of your experiences?

Deadline and submission: The deadline for the optional parts are at the end of the course. The report is sent to the examiner's urkund adress: matar63 dot liu at analys dot urkund dot se.

Page responsible: Mattias Arvola
Last updated: 2017-12-21