New design with developer constraints.
Extension of RUTD’s existing website (that helps Veterans find support) that includes meaningful improvements and feature additions while keeping a development time schedule.
My role:
In this collaborative project, my primary roles included:
I synthesized raw data from a stakeholder kickoff and competitive audit to create journey maps. I designed low fidelity wireframes as feature cards, presented those feature cards to a developer to understand the dev time constraints. As a team, we then performed Dot voting, and those selected with the most dotes used those wireframes in a Kano survey. With those results, I created high-fidelity annotated wireframes based on the features and feedback that I perceived as most valuable.
Research methods:
Stakeholder kickoff
Competitive audit
Journey mapping
Feature Cards
Tech scooping with feature cards
Dot voting
Kano survey
Annotated Wireframes
Findings report
Tools:
Google Forms
Zoom
Sketch
InVision
Hand sketches
Canva
Competitive Audit
My client, RUTD,
Goal: As a method of preliminary research, my team completed a competitive audit by examining similar tools to identify features, flows, and processes that are similar, different, or which could be valuable for RUTD.
Journey Maps.
After gathering information from the stakeholder kickoff and competitive audit, I created a journey map for the user group to visually model the existing process that the user ( a Veteran) is going through right now as RUTD does not exist.
Insights: Journey maps were not the best reporting tool for this project because I had to hypothesize a lot of the touchpoints and feelings of the users. If we had done contextual inquiry sessions with the users prior to creating the journey maps they would have felt more accurate and complete.
Feature Cards
Goals: Based on the research, I prototyped ways to address the goals of RUTD through new or expanded features. The RUTD lead developer scoped each feature and gave a priority of small, medium, large to the feature cards. As a group, we dot voted on what we thought were the best features to focus on and get more feedback on with a Kano survey.
Findings: Journey maps were not the best reporting tool for this project because I had to hypothesize a lot of the touchpoints and feelings of the users. If we had done contextual inquiry sessions with the users prior to creating the journey maps they would have felt more accurate and complete.
Annotated Wireframes.
Insights: Important insights were gathered from the Kano Analysis survey where nine veterans gave feedback on the proposed feature designs. Based on the Kano scores, the feedback quotes, and the scoped levels to complete each design, the following designs were chosen for wireframing.
Conclusion.
Features were designed to contribute to RUTD’s goals for the usability of the website based on key insights from the stakeholder kickoff and competitive audit. These particular features were prioritized based on the feedback from the Kano survey and allotted time budget. The next steps would be for the RUTD developers to implement these features based on the wireframes and annotations they were provided.