SlideShare una empresa de Scribd logo
1 de 28
Descargar para leer sin conexión
fast and fabulous:
                               adsfadf



Monday, April 13, 2009
tom maiorana

                     • who i am
                     • my experience
                     • what i’ve done


Monday, April 13, 2009
Early Contextual Research   Concept Validation   Usability Testing




Monday, April 13, 2009
Early Contextual Research   Concept Validation   Usability Testing


                     match                    match
                     intuit                   intuit
                    walmart                  canesta



Monday, April 13, 2009
good fast cheap



Monday, April 13, 2009
match.com




Monday, April 13, 2009
contextual research




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Survey Results, Ordered

                         Imagine that you are part of one of these couples.
                         You love your partner and you are still together after 5 years.
                         You are explaining how you met.

                         Please rate these scenarios from 1-5, least preferable to most preferable.

                           1             4.40      We met through friends.

                           2              3.61     We dated in high school, lost touch, then met on-line.

                           3             3.45      We met at work.

                           4             3.34      I had just given up on love. Then I met her/him (at work).

                           5             3.33      We were in the post-o ce.

                           6             3.02      I’d always got in his/her line at the grocery store.

                           7             3.00      I had just given up on love. Then I met him/her (on-line).

                           8             2.96      Our parents knew each other.

                           9             2.89      We were friends, but were over being single.

                           10            2.81      We were pen pals.

                           11            2.75      We met on-line.

                           12            2.66      A matchmaker put us together.

                           13            2.66      We met in a bar.

                           14            2.61      He/she pulled me over. I still got the ticket.

                           15            2.47      I was stationed in his/her village.

                           16            2.40      His/her kid was in my class. I had to wait a year.

                           17            1.89      I like uniforms, so I went after him/her.

                           18            1.88      My church went to his/her country.

                           19             1.58     We were both married to other people at the time.

Monday, April 13, 2009
what did we learn?



Monday, April 13, 2009
building to test
                               sharing




Monday, April 13, 2009
concept validation



Monday, April 13, 2009
Results of testing




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
What worked                                         What didn’t
         Consistently mentioned as one of users’ top three   Many people were confused

         Most everyone liked the visual design               Hard for people to describe themselves in three words

         “It drew me in.”                                    “It’s a little bit like a job interview”

         “It could makes the profile more fun”               “I like tennis, but I don’t know if I want that to describe
                                                             me”
         “I like having all those words to choose from.”
                                                             Even people that “got it” thought they needed to “game”
                                                             the system.




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
What worked                                           What didn’t
         Up Front Filtering                                    For some felt like a survey

         A different way to get at “deep information”          Interspersing Serious and Non-serious criteria

         The simplicity

         “It feels like it gives you more control. You don’t
         need to go through all those pages.”




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
What worked                              What didn’t
         Consistently mentioned as a favorite     Most folks were skeptical about the accuracy of
                                                  matches
         Everyone thought this was really sweet
                                                  Much more anxiety about picking a movie than
         Almost everyone could relate to it       anticipated

         Everyone knew how to use it              Many participants said they would choose a movie
                                                  they thought someone they liked would like

                                                  Confusion about how this would work (how does it
                                                  know if I’m a man or a woman?

                                                  Apprehension, “where will this take me?”




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
What worked                                         What didn’t
         Consistently mentioned as a favorite                The animation was a little slow

         The participants that loved this LOVED it           Participants wanted to know how would actually
                                                             work
         Several participants thought this opened a little
         room for fate in on-line dating

         This one had the strongest emotional response

         “It seems real, it seems like that could really
         happen”

         Several respondents saw Match as a key part of
         the story.




Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
What worked                                          What didn’t
         Most often referred to as “fun”                      Despite very positive responses at the time, not
                                                              often mentioned as a top favorite in follow-up
         Described as “simple, intuitive”, “a better way to   emails.
         search”
                                                              Not as popular in mentioning as would have
         Everyone understood how it worked.                   expected.

         Very humanized.

         “It feels like you are dealing with a person, even
         though it’s actually a server somewhere.”




Monday, April 13, 2009
Global Findings


                         High Anxiety
                         Users were much more anxious about entering information than anticipated.

                         Most participants wanted to know how information would be used.
                         “I wouldn’t put that if I thought it’d feed me into a certain kind of person.”




                         Show me the Dude Parade
                         The search results are the money shot.

                         All participants “checked out” the results, even if they knew it was fake.




                         Game On!
                         Most of the participants had an awareness of being in the system. They often seemed “on”
                         when responding to questions.

                         If a search mechanism wasn’t obvious, they wanted to know how it worked in order to know
                         how to work it.




Monday, April 13, 2009
walmart



Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009

Más contenido relacionado

Destacado

Maribel Lopez May 5
Maribel Lopez May 5Maribel Lopez May 5
Maribel Lopez May 5SIIA12
 
Bio clean reusable garments
Bio clean reusable garmentsBio clean reusable garments
Bio clean reusable garmentsShougata Bose
 
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012Edison Research
 
Williams Tison V2
Williams Tison V2Williams Tison V2
Williams Tison V2Karical
 
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research Presentation
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research PresentationWake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research Presentation
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research PresentationEdison Research
 
Judith Estrin May 4
Judith Estrin May 4Judith Estrin May 4
Judith Estrin May 4SIIA12
 
Chris Anderson May 5
Chris Anderson May 5Chris Anderson May 5
Chris Anderson May 5SIIA12
 
Digital media landscape in india
Digital media landscape in indiaDigital media landscape in india
Digital media landscape in indiaPragnendra Rahevar
 
What is the Balanced Scorecard?
What is the Balanced Scorecard?What is the Balanced Scorecard?
What is the Balanced Scorecard?Pragnendra Rahevar
 
Cost and time estimation methods pros and cons
Cost and time estimation methods pros and consCost and time estimation methods pros and cons
Cost and time estimation methods pros and consPragnendra Rahevar
 

Destacado (12)

Go Zone Presentation
Go Zone PresentationGo Zone Presentation
Go Zone Presentation
 
Maribel Lopez May 5
Maribel Lopez May 5Maribel Lopez May 5
Maribel Lopez May 5
 
Bio clean reusable garments
Bio clean reusable garmentsBio clean reusable garments
Bio clean reusable garments
 
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012
Beyond Country's P1s - Edison Research Presentation for CRS 2012
 
Williams Tison V2
Williams Tison V2Williams Tison V2
Williams Tison V2
 
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research Presentation
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research PresentationWake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research Presentation
Wake Me Up! Country Radio Seminar 2015 Research Presentation
 
Judith Estrin May 4
Judith Estrin May 4Judith Estrin May 4
Judith Estrin May 4
 
Chris Anderson May 5
Chris Anderson May 5Chris Anderson May 5
Chris Anderson May 5
 
Digital media landscape in india
Digital media landscape in indiaDigital media landscape in india
Digital media landscape in india
 
What is the Balanced Scorecard?
What is the Balanced Scorecard?What is the Balanced Scorecard?
What is the Balanced Scorecard?
 
Makeover of indian politics
Makeover of indian politicsMakeover of indian politics
Makeover of indian politics
 
Cost and time estimation methods pros and cons
Cost and time estimation methods pros and consCost and time estimation methods pros and cons
Cost and time estimation methods pros and cons
 

SIIA Usability Maiorana

  • 1. fast and fabulous: adsfadf Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 2. tom maiorana • who i am • my experience • what i’ve done Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 3. Early Contextual Research Concept Validation Usability Testing Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 4. Early Contextual Research Concept Validation Usability Testing match match intuit intuit walmart canesta Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 5. good fast cheap Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 9. Survey Results, Ordered Imagine that you are part of one of these couples. You love your partner and you are still together after 5 years. You are explaining how you met. Please rate these scenarios from 1-5, least preferable to most preferable. 1 4.40 We met through friends. 2 3.61 We dated in high school, lost touch, then met on-line. 3 3.45 We met at work. 4 3.34 I had just given up on love. Then I met her/him (at work). 5 3.33 We were in the post-o ce. 6 3.02 I’d always got in his/her line at the grocery store. 7 3.00 I had just given up on love. Then I met him/her (on-line). 8 2.96 Our parents knew each other. 9 2.89 We were friends, but were over being single. 10 2.81 We were pen pals. 11 2.75 We met on-line. 12 2.66 A matchmaker put us together. 13 2.66 We met in a bar. 14 2.61 He/she pulled me over. I still got the ticket. 15 2.47 I was stationed in his/her village. 16 2.40 His/her kid was in my class. I had to wait a year. 17 1.89 I like uniforms, so I went after him/her. 18 1.88 My church went to his/her country. 19 1.58 We were both married to other people at the time. Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 10. what did we learn? Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 11. building to test sharing Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 13. Results of testing Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 15. What worked What didn’t Consistently mentioned as one of users’ top three Many people were confused Most everyone liked the visual design Hard for people to describe themselves in three words “It drew me in.” “It’s a little bit like a job interview” “It could makes the profile more fun” “I like tennis, but I don’t know if I want that to describe me” “I like having all those words to choose from.” Even people that “got it” thought they needed to “game” the system. Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 17. What worked What didn’t Up Front Filtering For some felt like a survey A different way to get at “deep information” Interspersing Serious and Non-serious criteria The simplicity “It feels like it gives you more control. You don’t need to go through all those pages.” Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 19. What worked What didn’t Consistently mentioned as a favorite Most folks were skeptical about the accuracy of matches Everyone thought this was really sweet Much more anxiety about picking a movie than Almost everyone could relate to it anticipated Everyone knew how to use it Many participants said they would choose a movie they thought someone they liked would like Confusion about how this would work (how does it know if I’m a man or a woman? Apprehension, “where will this take me?” Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 21. What worked What didn’t Consistently mentioned as a favorite The animation was a little slow The participants that loved this LOVED it Participants wanted to know how would actually work Several participants thought this opened a little room for fate in on-line dating This one had the strongest emotional response “It seems real, it seems like that could really happen” Several respondents saw Match as a key part of the story. Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 23. What worked What didn’t Most often referred to as “fun” Despite very positive responses at the time, not often mentioned as a top favorite in follow-up Described as “simple, intuitive”, “a better way to emails. search” Not as popular in mentioning as would have Everyone understood how it worked. expected. Very humanized. “It feels like you are dealing with a person, even though it’s actually a server somewhere.” Monday, April 13, 2009
  • 24. Global Findings High Anxiety Users were much more anxious about entering information than anticipated. Most participants wanted to know how information would be used. “I wouldn’t put that if I thought it’d feed me into a certain kind of person.” Show me the Dude Parade The search results are the money shot. All participants “checked out” the results, even if they knew it was fake. Game On! Most of the participants had an awareness of being in the system. They often seemed “on” when responding to questions. If a search mechanism wasn’t obvious, they wanted to know how it worked in order to know how to work it. Monday, April 13, 2009