Lessons Learnt in NM4210

With the module coming to a close (submission of softcopy and report is this friday), I must say that the workload for this module is rather heavy. However, it's one of the most interesting module that I've taken in NUS, period.

I got to know and learn all the techniques taught in the lectures. Although Mr. Reddy said during classes that we have seen these methods before, but I have not, heh. Perhaps it's because I'm from SoC, and perhaps these methods are taught in other modules taken by FASS students.

I only knew, survey/questionaire, interview, VBR & focus group b4 hand. But I've got to learn new stuff like cultual probe, laddering, card sorting, 4 pleasures framework, RMA analysis, heuristic evaluation, UX evaluation and the most used item by us throughout the final project, user persona profiling.


The Execution

Learning is one thing, executing is another! We had to learn along the way, what we did right, what we did wrong and adapt from there. Of all the methods, I thought the UX evaluation, 4 pleasures framework and persona profiling as very insightful.

UX evaluation

For UX evaluation, it is really quite straightforward for the testers to evaluate. Just giving and rating on the adjectives. It's something I'll use in the future. But then, the selecting of words used is quite tricky. Some are really closely related, and thus, there's potential biasness or "double counting", making the results incorrect.

Also, the words used might be unclear to the evaluators. Term such like contempt (which we used for Park.a.lot UX evaluation) is a word that we seldom use, and thus cant directly relate to it. Further clarification was needed.

The results from this evaluation is very tangible, i feel. We can relate to the word and the direct scores to it, making it a very fast and efficient way in getting decent feedbacks (emotion) for the product.

4 pleasures framework

We used this framework in analyzing the pleasureness that the prototype can give. It's a rather difficult framework to use though, esp when for ideological and sociological. Till today, I still cant differiente a statement immediately if it came from either category. The former is about values and the latter is about relationships. They sometimes cross each other's path (at least for myself, heh) Then again, I thought this is a really powerful tool to be used, as it covers all aspects, physical, cognitive, relationships and values.


Personas

This method of identifying users for our products is really useful. It really makes things "easier" per se, as this personas prevent us from going into feature creeping, hoping to add more and more, for more and more people. This in turn compromise the system, and thus, not able to satisfy users, which is bad. Most, if not all of our in depth evaluation used personas of our system as evaluators. It's easier to remember these "fake characters" than recalling characteristics that these people possess.


Needs 1st, solutions later

More often than not, we always come up with the solution, and try to squeeze a need into it. Sometimes, that might work, but potentially dangerous. I have really understood the need to KNOW THE NEED, so that we can better cater to the NEED. That's how Park.a.lot actually came about. We really think thoroughly what is needed for drivers, and that came up. Then slowly, our solution is simply matching the needs, enabling viewing of CP info and booking of lots.


I've learnt much from this module, and will definitely keep them in check. Cheers~!