MS Informatics e-Portfolio
Competency D
Identify user needs, ideate informatics products and services, prototype new concepts, and evaluate a prototype’s usability
Introduction
While understanding the business environment is critical to the success of an informatics project, it’s also important to understand your users. The end users of an informatics solution may vary case by case; for example, one may be redesigning the user interface of a company website, where the target users are customers, or one might be designing a metadata solution used to organize the company’s video assets, where target users are individuals working in the marketing department. Regardless of who ends up being the target users of an informatics solution, it is essential to follow the general concepts laid out in Competency D during the user research phase.
During the discussion around Competency D, I believe it is important to point out the benefits of user research. Ghosh (2018) suggested that while “[m]any people think a research phase would be a waste of time and money…. [u]ser research provides an essential foundation for design strategy. It helps you to create an optimal product for users. Most importantly, you’ll have the data to back your strategy and design decisions” (para. 2 & 7). Additionally, it “also helps you to identify early adopters who would use your product” (Ghosh, 2018, para. 8). With user research one can evaluate user needs and feedback by evaluating reactions such as those from a prototype of an informatics product or service.
A prototype, as defined by Sharp et al. (2019), is “one manifestation of a design that allows stakeholders to interact with it and to explore its suitability” (p. 422). Prototypes are not limited just to one type of medium but can come in many forms such as “anything from a paper-based storyboard to a complex piece of software, and from a cardboard mocked up to a molded or pressed piece of metal.” (Sharp et al., 2019, p. 422). Rosenfeld et al. (2015) illustrated different means that are commonly employed in the field of Information Architecture, during the user research phase these means include tests and interactive prototypes. Tests are often used earlier in the user research phase and they include activities such as card sorting and task performance analysis (p. 364). Fully interactive prototypes come later in the user research phase and are “digital renditions [that] show how the product will look and function. They are concrete and often aesthetically compelling” (Rosenfeld et al., 2015, p. 366 & 433).
Sharp et al. (2019) corroborates a similar view to Rosenfeld et al. in that the means used to gauge users varies in complexity depending on where one is during the user research phase. Low-fidelity prototyping (i.e. storyboarding, sketching, prototyping with index cards, and Wizard of Oz prototyping) are used during the early stages of user research since it is “simple, cheap, and quick to produce” but it “does not look very much like the final product, nor does it provide the same functionality;” high-fidelity prototyping differs since it more resource intensive and happens during later stages of user research and “looks more like the final product and usually provides more functionality than a lower-fidelity prototype” (i.e. Python or executable language code versus paper mock-up). (Sharp et al., 2019, p. 426-429).
Discussion
The emphasis of understanding your users and the importance of user research has been a common theme in many classes that I have taken in the informatics program. Though some classes discussed these concepts briefly within the context of the primary topic of study, I was given the opportunity to put these concepts into practice in assignments for two classes. The two classes where I got to explore user research and prototyping were INFM 204 and INFM 207.
Evidence
Here I submit evidence of satisfying Competency D by including my INFM 204 group project presentation pitch for a website Information Architecture redesign and my INFM 207 video clip metadata project. Both of these projects demonstrate Competency D by identifying a problem, specifically a problem that is getting in the way of a good user experience. The problems addressed by the projects reflect real-world scenarios such as redesigning a website (INFM 204) and creating solutions to improve the findability and useability of digital content such as video clips (INFM 207). These projects identify and explain the problem and then propose a solution for users in the form of a low-fidelity prototype. In each, I explained my reasoning behind the low-fidelity prototypes and how they function to confront previous difficulties.
In the first piece of evidence, the INFM 204 group project presentation pitch for a website Information Architecture redesign, my project partner and I portray a fictional consulting company called Engel&Rampas Inc. who has been contracted to improve our client’s website (e.g. Derek Savage Productions). Originally, this piece of evidence was used for our presentation to the class in a seminar-style discussion. Similar to a meeting with our clients, our class asked us about our prototypes and suggested ideas for future revision which were incorporated in our final project in the class (e.g. the final project report). The evidence presented here has been adapted from the original shared slide deck and script, which were used in our live presentation to the class, and has been converted into a recorded, narrated video presentation with me performing the voiceover. In our presentation pitch, we first identified and analyzed some of the user interface and Information Architecture problems that were plaguing our client’s website. In the next step, we included our high-level goals for our redesign plan. After explaining our high-level goals, the rest of the presentation explained the test and prototypes we planned on using to conduct our user research: the test and prototypes included examples of a card sorting exercise, user persona, user scenario, site map, and wireframes. Once we were finished presenting our user research examples and prototypes, we opened up the floor for questions and feedback from the class as part of the evaluation stage of user research. The INFM 204 group project presentation pitch gave me an opportunity to demonstrate Competency D by proposing an informatics solution to solve problems which were likely negatively affecting our client’s business and online presence. We were able to gauge the effectiveness of our tests and prototypes based on live class feedback, which allowed us to iterate and improve them for our final project report.
In the second piece of evidence, my INFM 207 video clip metadata project, I had a chance to practice creating a metadata schema for digital content. In this project, I needed to create my own metadata schema for a collection of eighteen mp4 video clips. Based on some initial research, I decided that I would base my metadata schema on a well-known metadata standard in the world of library science called Dublin Core. Following the principles of Dublin Core, I was able to create a schema for all eighteen video clips which was comprised of twelve metadata elements such as title, type, format, length, identifier, contributor, source, date, creator, publisher, rights, description, and subject. In the latter part of the assignment, following the metadata field examples for each video, I explained my justification for choosing the Dublin Core based standard, discussed possibilities for automatically generated metadata and bulk entry, expressed legal and rights concerns relating to video clips and metadata, reviewed issues pertaining to access to the collection and the user experience, and considered how the collection could be organized through taxonomy. This second piece of evidence exhibits aspects included in Competency D because it took the issue of a lack of findability and useability of the digital content and proposed a solution with a low-fidelity prototype which consisted of filled in metadata fields for each clip in the beginning of the assignment. The second part of the assignment focused on additional parts of Competency D like addressing user needs, evaluating the prototype, and thinking about how the solution can be improved for future use.
INFM 204 Group Project Pitch Presentation
INFM 207 Video Clip Metadata Project
Conclusion
Both assignments presented here enabled me to experiment with solutions that are focused on improving the user experience related to information access. The first piece of evidence, the group project pitch presentation, got me thinking about how user research is conducted and how real-world corporations think when redesigning their online presence to better market their brand to their consumers. The second piece of evidence, the video clip metadata project, exposed me to the concept of metadata schemas and how metadata powers the websites we visit for ecommerce, entertainment, education, etc. Additionally, I was given an opportunity to critique my prototypes and receive feedback from others which are required for iterative, user-centric design.
References
Ghosh, A. (2018, September 24). UX research is essential to product success. UXmatters.
Rosenfeld, L., Morville, P., & Arango, J. (2015). Information Architecture: For the web and
beyond (4th Edition). O’Reilly.
Sharp, H., Rogers, Y., & Preece J. (2019). Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer
Interaction (5th Edition). Wiley.