Role // Product designer
Year // 2020
The Challenge
Goal
The aim was to devise a workflow that enables users to easily add new missions, associate relevant tasks, and evaluate unit readiness for mission completion. Further, a simplified method was designed to update, manage, and view the organizational structure within a large-scale platform.
Usability Tests
We executed two rounds of usability testing with five system-savvy participants, addressing identified issues between rounds for validation.
Usability Test Goals (what do we want to achieve)
Can users understand, learn and discover what they need?
Reenforce design changes decisions
Discover issues unnoticed
Emotional reactions (possible implications for SUS – System Usability Scale)
Practice and refine the process of how we set up and conduct UTs
Research Questions Focus (what do we want to know)
Map learnability and discoverability for users
Map problems in orientation and navigation in screens following the changes we made.
Check terminology and hierarchy understanding
Detailed check if our new visual design (icons, colors, typography hierarchy, etc) works for users
“ It's straight forward and easy to work with.
I know what to do. Everything is explained. “
Findings
Navigation and orientation
Consistency leads to clarity and contributes to the feeling of “easy learnability”
The design of CTAs, input fields, elements layouts and behaviour enabled users to move easily within a page and to the next screen.
Terminology and Information Architecture
Terminology created confusion as it did not align with expectations based on mental models of how the system works today. Example: Training Plan confused with Training Program
Not enough alignment to expected hierarchy structures in the real world. Example: It was hard to understand same Task is added several times to Training Plan Requests and its relation to Master Plans
Some copy (texts) caused usability issues. Example: “Training Alternatives” title above a list of “Master Plans”
