Look back through the previous sections. Describe Tokairo's approach to design. How these map onto the ID activities and characteristics of the ID process?
Having established the user requirements, Tokairo bought their own experience into the design process. Some of the major decisions - such as the choice of touch-screen input and the choice of a "big lottery ticket" form - were made rapidly, after consideration of alternatives, but not necessarily after much iteration. In the case of the basic form design, rather than the ID activity of "Developing alternative designs" they evaluated alternative existing designs, to similar effect but presumably at rather lower cost. The use of the team's professional experience seems to have provided a similar short-cut for the kiosk design, and might be seen as a greater difference from the ID method.
The form design was tested in the wild (in "the most militant driver area they could find") and maps to the ID activity "Building interactive versions of the design".
There was explicit evaluation of both the Kiosk and Form designs and this corresponds to the ID "Evaluating designs" activity.
The ID characteristic "focus on users" can be seen in the whole requirements stage, and in thepre-beta field testing of the form, though less so in the implementation of the kiosk design where the client preferred to provide a user proxy.
The "Specific usability and user-experience goals" ID characteristic is arguable "absent but unnecessary" due to the short lines of communication and clear implicit focus in this area.
And the ID characteristic of "Iteration" can be seen in mainly within activities, in the refinement of the kiosk and form designs based on the feedback from users, user proxies and field testing.
No comments:
Post a Comment