Lecture Outline

1. Design Thinking: EmpathizeMaker: AdruinoTopics in Internet of ThingsNational Taiwan UniversityFeb 27, 2019*** Adapt teaching materials from the Stanford HCI course (with permission & many thanks to Prof. James Landay of Stanford)

2. Lecture Outline Design Thinking: Empathize • Lecture on needfinding technique, contextual inquiry • Studioon Interview & Extreme Users Makers: Adruino • Lecture & Studio

3. Empathize (also called design discovery, needfinding)

4. Lecture Outline • Needfinding Techniques: • Contextual Inquiry • Interview (studio) • Observation (studio) • Why do needfinding?

5. Are you the Customer? • Why not? • Different experiences • Different terminology • Different ways of looking at the world • Identify needs at the start avoids these mistakes • Designing for “me” • Build without a need, Trail and error innovation [?] dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

6. Trial-and-Error Innovation – try luck? NEEDS DESIGN DESIGN ＥＶＡＬＵＡＴＥ　 ＮＥＥＤ？ EVALUATE Needs IMPLEMENT PROTOTYPE unlucky lucky

7. Understanding the Customers • How do you learn how your customers work? • interviews, self report, experience sampling (ESM), & observation • How do you learn how your customers think inside their heads? • observe users performing tasks, think-aloud protocol • How do you learn how your customers interact with devices? • analytics & logging, observe • Important to carry out in naturalistic settings • outside the lab → “ecologically valid” • study behaviors in real-life situations dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

8. Contextual Inquiry • Specific needfinding method for understanding customers’ needs & work practices • Master / Apprentice model allows customer to teach us what they do! ? • master does the work & talks about it while working • we interrupt to ask questions as they go • Hybrid approach: direct observation + interviewing to elicit more details • The Where, How, and What expose the Why dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

9. Master/Apprentice relationship with the participant Participant is doing stuff • Participant explains what they’re doing to the researcher • Researcher asks a clarification question, the participant answers, keeps doing • Researcher’s goal is to develop understanding • of what the participant is doing • in partnership with participant master researcher

10. Also not quitea master/apprentice relationship • Researcher’s goal is not to learn to do the task • Instead, goal is to learn enough how the participant does the task, so that you can learn how to support it with technology (光劍) • And to enlist the participant’s active assistance in understanding the task

11. Direct & In-Situ Observation Observe participants engaged in the desired activity in the typical context of that activity • First-hand experience by doing the activity along with the participant • Actively engaged, and allows questions along the way What may be the problems if not in-situ?

12. Ask open-ended questions • Confirming understanding • Did you just delete all your messages? • How do they feel about… • How do you like the organization and colors of this interface? • What is frustrating them about… • It looks like you can’t do something, what are you trying to do? • How they compare one thing with another • What are the reasons you prefer searching rather than foldering? • Why did they just do that? (but try to phrase without “Why”) • It looks like you just deleted 10 messages, what was the reason for doing that?

13. Avoid asking about • Predicting what they would do / like / want • Imagining a hypothetical scenario • Whether they would like a certain feature or product • Estimating how often they do things

14. Decide how you’re going to record the inquiry • Written notes • Audio record • Pictures • Video • Usage logs • An additional observer • Combination of methods • Privacy and informed consent (more later)

15. Good method only part of the answer! • Good participants • May screen participants based on attributes you are looking for • Good setting • Natural, relaxed, no distraction • Good timing • Respect participants’ schedule

16. Contextual Inquiry example • Say you want to design an on-line dating service • You want to improve the process of finding dates • It’s a topic where people act very differently than they say they act • Hopefully fun (without offending anyone)

17. What people to pick for observation? • People who find dates very easily (expert) • People who have a hard time finding dates (problem child) • People who have never been on a date before (novice) • People who said yes when you asked them

18. Where to pick a place? • Senior Center? • Bar? • Dorm dances? • Student centers? • Perhaps best informed by your participant

19. When’s a good time to observe? • Finals week? • During classes? • Weekend

20. How are you going to observe? • Make it a double date? • Passively observe with follow-up • But if Bob is successful, it might be hard to follow-up with him for a while! • Informed consent is an issue • Have Bob explains the situation to other people? • Limit data collected on others

21. How are you going to record it? • Written notes? Could be awkward • Audio record? Maybe in just momentary dictations • Pictures? Perhaps you could work a few in as a double date with a camera phone • Video? That’s a (bad) reality TV show • This inquiry may rely heavily on your own memory and reconstruction

22. Actually observing • Pick the person: Bob • Pick the place: Pub near campus • Pick the time: Friday/Sat night

23. You’re at the pub with Bob • First start with a conventional interview • Introduce self, explain interview procedure (consent, recording, how CIs work) • Ask Bob to summarize what goal he will be working towards during the CI • Don’t take too long on this

24. Switch to observation mode • Researcher should clearly and very explicitly end the interview and invite them to proceed with their activity • Important, because if it’s not completely clear, encounter may devolve into a traditional interview (this relationship is more familiar to people)

25. OK… • Now have Bob go about his normal tasks, exactly as he would if you weren’t there: pretending to look at the menu, scoping the place, trying to start conversations, eating, drinking • As he’s doing it, ask him to explain whenever it’s not 100% obvious (or note for later follow-up) • And take lots of notes

26. Follow-up interview • Best if prompted with concrete details from activity • Stories from written notes • Pictures or clips from recordings • Try to reconstruct how they were feeling at the time

27. Appreciate your participants! • Even token appreciation is helpful • Lunch vouchers • Company SWAG • Early access to technology • Social status • What you think may work at NTU?

28. How many participants? • Depends on what you’re doing • Statistical power needs ~50 • Richer feedback more like ~12 • Intuitive feel / diminishing returns • When you start hearing similar themes • When you stop learning new things • We’ll be asking for specific numbers (3-5), but in working world, you’ll need to decide based on experience and constraints (time, $)

29. Time • Conventional interview (10 minutes) • introduce focus, deal with ethical issues, how the data would be used • Transition (30 seconds) • state new rules – they work while you watch & interrupt • Observation & contextual interview (20-60 minutes) • take notes, draw, be nosy! (“who was on the phone?”) • Wrap-up (15 minutes) • summarize your notes & confirm what is important • appreciation dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

30. Users: Unique or One of Many? “Take the attitude that nothing any person does is done for no reason; if you think it’s for no reason, you don’t yet understand the point of view from which it makes sense. Take the attitude that nothing any person does is unique to them, it always represents an important class of customers whose needs will not be met if you don’t figure out what’s going on.”(p. 63, Contextual Design) dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

31. Analyzing Data • What are we going to do with all CI, interview, observation data? • Next lecture will introduce an user data analysis technique called empathy map. • say • think • do • feel

32. Analysis session • Each researcher presents each CI case • Other participants ask questions, share similar or contrasting examples from their data • Look for patterns across cases • Come up with an insightful problem statement called Point of View.

33. Group effort • Each group member should do at least one contextual inquiry • Analysis done by whole group

34. Further Reading • Books • User and Task Analysis for Interface Design by Joann T. Hackos, Janice C. Redish • The Inmates are Running the Asylum by Alan Cooper • Don Norman, The Design of Everyday Things • Kuniavsky, Observing the User Experience • Institute of Design at Stanford • lots of online materials athttp://dschool.stanford.edu dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

35. Summary • Know your user & involve them in design • Needfinding • observe & listen to them to discover interesting insights • empathize with customers • Contextual inquiry • interview & observe real customers in situ • master-apprentice model dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation

36. Next week • Project Assignment #1 out on the course webpage • Due on 10/3 • Will announce teams tomorrow (start ASAP after this). • Each team must schedule an appointment with me on project topic selection. Appointment signup sheet in assignment #1 pdf. • Reading Assignments before next class • ABC News Nightline IDEO Deep Dive, July 1999 (22 minutes) Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 • Video: ABC News, IDEO Design Thinking, Jan. 6, 2013 (60 minutes) • video: How to give a great research talk, Patrick Baudisch, (18 min, start from 12th min and end on 30th min) dt+UX: Design Thinking for User Experience Design, Prototyping & Evaluation