I recently published my thesis in fulfillment of my master's degree specialising in product design (300 pages).
A new and improved solution to design and build user interfaces (UI) that could assist in my work reducing expenditure and resources. By utilising 'quantitative' and 'qualitative' research methodology
I was able to achieve it.
There are eight popular design frameworks widely used by global enterprises to design and build products centred on their users and business assumptions. UX methodologies generate design frameworks to administer the process of designing user interfaces (UI).
Research has shown that organisations that leverage UX are superior to those that compete on functionality or price alone.
My research aimed at testing the efficacy of my refined ‘Whistlebox’ design framework, (named after its namesake 'Whistlebox mobile app')
by comparing it with the world's two most popular design frameworks: "Lean UX" and Google's "Design Sprint".
The UX Challenge
Having conducted and managed multiple streams of projects, my team risked producing low-quality products for our customers.
By using design frameworks we were able to satisfy deadlines but it became an exhaustive practice.
To reduce the amount of time and resources building applications I had to find a better solution.
By creating a better design framework for the organisation we would be able to achieve our business goals. However, end-users,
simulation tools, and professional health practitioners can affect the design process's final design. I identified some issues
relating to stakeholder support and timely delivery.
A poorly designed user interface can contribute to workplace technology workers with stress and frustration levels escalate to both verbal
and physical abuse. There is another crucial aspect to investigate where environmental safety is of utmost importance. Consider UI on systems
for use on aircraft, air traffic management, thermal power stations, and medical devices. There are two examples
of this, the first on “the three-mile island nuclear power plant disaster.” The other exposes a “cover-up
when the United States government” destroyed a passenger plane by accident. Subsequently, it demonstrates how safety can be severely
compromised by poor UI design.
The UX Approach
I will create a UX design framework that will help organisations save time and money in designing and developing UI.
By implementing new techniques from cognitive design for UI, organisations can produce high-quality products
Users who easily interact with a computer system and an application based on good UI find that the experience is easy to comprehend and helps users complete tasks.
Businesses that neglect their application’s UX disadvantage their brand, so it is essential to understand and invest in the importance of UX as a paramount dogma of the design process.
Jesse James Garrett developed a conceptual understanding of digital product design to summarise a
broader view to illustrate the decisions product designers generate to build content. Site objectives
& User Needs are sometimes aligned. If the company's objectives were more important than the user’s needs,
this layer would interrupt the user while browsing the application. This is a balancing act for the company to ask for money without discouraging it. Content requirements & Functional Specifications determine how you arrange the amount of content in a layout that provides the best user experience. Layer 3: Information
architecture & Interactive Design uses two disciplines that ask the question, ‘how are information organised,
and can you interact with them?’ Interface, Navigation & Information Design present information efficiently and effectively to navigate and complete a task. Visual Design: This is the aesthetics skin of the application that users love to interact with.
UX has become a popular discipline in innovation because it is key to producing great products.
The following behaviour models were applied to design a better user experience (UX) for the user.
The ‘Hooked Model’ is based upon ‘habit-forming products’ designed to drive user engagement.
The model is used for user retention that encourages the user to revisit the product and continue using them.
This model helps prioritises information and actions based upon the user’s proficiency level.
Users are only shown what is obvious for the first time they encounter a product. As they gain knowledge,
users adapt and access what is easier to use.
There needs to be a basic understanding of approaches, practices, and concepts accumulated over the years. UX design is a complex field to comprehend, and my research explores how UX can be addressed for people to harness it rather than dissuade them from using it.
CBT is used to treat mental health symptoms and is designed to re-calibrate the part of the brain that’s keeping such a tight hold on your happy thoughts. A research was conducted to observe patients with anti-social behaviour where “the average subject in the CBT condition was better off than 76% of control subjects”. CBT looks at the relationship between your feelings, thoughts, and behaviours and how you relate with yourself, people, and the world around you. This knowledge is the key to identifying conditions that influence users, especially in correlation with the aesthetic function.
ALSO KNOWN AS. THE SOCIAL FUNCTION OF LANGUAGE: According to Geoffery Leech (1974), this function explains the conceptual meaning than the affective meaning. Any art that is valued as actual art is associated with this function. The ‘five love languages’ comes into effect by association with this function.
It is valued for its beauty rather than its usefulness.
‘The five love languages’ was written to help parents perceive love best from one of the five languages that fill their child's emotional tank. Each child has one primary and secondary love language.
They motivate a child to live out their quality of life. The five love languages are: touch, quality time,
assertive words, acts of service, and gifts.
The Final Product
Based on the literature review on UX design methodologies, three design frameworks were tested and analysed, they were: 'Lean UX',
'Google Design Sprint' and the 'Whistlebox Design Framework'. Participants were seperated into three groups
to evaluate the frameworks in order to report their findings. Click here for a full summary of our research
THE NEW FRAMEWORK
INTERVIEW & SURVEY: The client was interviewed face to face and undertaken an online survey to gather explicit data for me.
SPRINT 1: The data collected was too premature to determine an outcome, so the dependant variables were brainstormed for ideas and user pain points. This was the ‘Ideation’ process where participants looked for solutions to mitigate obstacles. It was performed by asking the ‘How Might We?’ (HMW) question reiterated throughout the sprints.
SPRINT 2. During the ‘Conceptual Design’ process, the participants learned 'user-centred design’ concepts using
visual aids such as mood boards designed to ascertain the organisation’s brand values acquired in
SPRINT 3: The ‘Visual Design’ process designed sitemaps and wireframes. The participants could test and finetune the prototype with the stakeholder before SPRINT 4: The development process encountered rigorous design testing.
SPRINT 5. The HMW narrative completed the design and development process.
LEARNING OUTCOMES: The participants required a design thinking mindset to translate their annotations from the workshops to help drive innovation in their designs. The following was the accomplished breakdown of professional and personal development: 1) Participants gained user empathy through observation and interviewing and developed user insights to identify user pain points. 2) Used multiple brainstorming techniques to find innovative solutions.
3) Participants prototyped a solution to a user challenge. 4) They developed and tested the proof of concept to
support the viability of the hypothesis.
Source: (SurveyMonkey). SPRINT CHECKLISTS: All correspondence and dialogue were harvested online, and group
discussions were based on practical challenges and sharing of assemblages accumulated during sprints, whether they
were produced onsite or remotely. TIMESHEETS: Group activities were recorded using online timesheets to measure
time and reduce bias. The sprint checklists were designed to orchestrate and track time discrepancies found in
timesheets that were monitored around the clock. When participants work as a group, the timesheets act as a
compliance tool to reinforce accountability and transparency.
EXIT FEEDBACK: To ensure that all our findings
were recorded for a report, an additional data collection session was conducted for all involved upon exiting
the research study. Extra data that was gathered was extended to improve the running of future workshops and services.
FRAMEWORK: The results show that the Whistlebox Design Framework was 50% more agile than the two most popular
design frameworks. The data depicts the Whistlebox design framework produced a mobile application in fifth-teen
(15) days. Where the Lean UX design framework had generated the application in forty-three (43) days, the google
design framework had generated its application in thirty-three (33) days.
SPRINT 1: The ‘Conceptual’ process: represents the Whistlebox design framework accelerated the time difference.
It indicates that by using the CBT tables, the participants could conduct their objectives in conjunction with the online survey on the same day. However, due to the design of their frameworks, both control variants were restricted to separate iterations. SPRINT 2: The ‘Ideation’ process demonstrates how the workshops could provide a
level playing field among participants to reduce bias.
SPRINT 3: The ‘Visual Design’ process represents the ‘hallmark’ of the Whistlebox design framework. The CBT tables had reduced the design process when it predicted the design feature for the application. SPRINT 4: The ‘A/B Testing & Development’ process reflected their design thinking process's effectiveness. SPRINT 5: The ‘Debugging & Development’ process where the results
demonstrate the hallmark of Whistlebox started and finished strong
EXIT FEEDBACK: The recruitment phase processed nine (9) participants, including the client.
The outcome revealed that only 10% experienced the preboarding process below expectation. This was caused by the delay of the ethics approval, which failed to execute the preboarding process on time. However, 40% of the participants acknowledged that the recruitment process met their expectations, where the majority remained very optimistic, exceeding their expectations. Most of the participants found the second phase of the methodology extremely valuable. They expressed high interest in partaking in the workshops and believed the experience boosted their confidence levels.
SPRINTS: Overall, the groups took longer to process their visual designs & user-testing during Sprints 3 & 4.
ONSITE: Group 1 analysing the Lean UX took longer because when they skipped a process (mood boards – ideation, visual),
they failed to capture the visual language of the brand that had a ripple effect throughout the whole process.
How Group 2 started strong but failed to complete their application on time. REMOTE: Both control groups struggled with their processes based on experience utilising new software tools for their framework and team dynamics encountered during the study.
The UX Impact
The best method to achieve a task is the one that uses less effort. The Whistlebox design framework could turn obstacles into opportunities and assist organisations, product owners, and design teams design software rapidly. Analysis of responses demonstrated the ‘Whistlebox’ design framework was by far the most agile framework with unprecedented methodology rapidly accomplishing goals by 50%. The framework was established to improve the development of software. It saved money on resources and reduced our SDLC process significantly by more than 50%. Design frameworks are specifically designed to help organisations organise information with efficacy using visuals to improve UI design. The Whistlebox design framework employs a simple algorithm that applies ‘the principle of least effort’. Its credibility was forged by utilising one UX designer and one software developer (equivalent to
one UX unicorn) - this process is usually reserved for a larger team of practitioners. The efficacy of the
framework saved our clients from spending tens of thousands of dollars.