Case Study: Alarms Usage and Enhancement

This case study describes how an evaluation research was conducted to validate proposed design solutions for enhancing an alarm feature in a software product.

Prior Generative Research Findings

1

Alarms Usage Scenarios

1. Operators persona uses alarms feature every day. Managers twice a week.

2. They receive alerts both by email and inside the system.


2

Top 3 Pains

1. Too many alerts.

2. Not enough information on how to solve alarms.

3. Not enough filtering options to identify relevant alarm.

Prior Research Data Collection Methods

Focus Group Methodology

List of questions, 2-3 facilitators. One manages, others document.

5 Finger Statements

For specific insights - Each participant raised one to five fingers based on how much he disagrees to agrees with the statement presented.

Evaluation research former background

1

Generative research

Former UX researcher discovered user's pains from The Alarm feature in the product

2

Design Sprint Workshop

Stakeholders had decided to prioritize the Alarm enhancements initiative, and the UX designer created design solutions after a design sprint workshop.

3

New UX Researcher (that's me)

I entered the project as a new member in the Team, replacing the former UX researcher in the evaluation phase, after the design was prototyped and needed evaluation.

Evaluation Research Mission

Validate Assumptions

Ensure the new alarm enhancements align with users' needs and pain points.

Gather Feedback

Understand users' overall impressions of the new alarm enhancement features.

Identify Impact

Determine which specific enhancements had the greatest positive impact from the users' perspective.

Determine Iterations

Identify any additional changes needed to further optimize the alarm management experience.

Generative New Research Preparation

1

Prior Interviews Review

Dig in the repository to learn of the former research pains.

2

Match Pains to Solutions

Match the pain from prior research to the designed solution to learn how the new design had answered it.

3

Cross Match Analysis

Discover the cross match between the pains and the solutions.

Pain + solution match: Alerts Description

Pain

  • Alerts description is too generic
  • Can't figure out the root cause
  • How to fix the issue

Solution

  • Alarm static details and information
  • Alarm History
  • Alarm troubleshooting - how to solve - root cause

Pain + solution match: Alarm Suppression

Pain

1. No option to Suppress and shelf alerts to later time.

2. A need for a snooze alarm.

Solution

Snooze or suppress alarm.

Pain + solution match: Personalization & Filtering

Pain

Personalization - a need for more filters for relevant alarms or critical alarms.

Solution

  • Improve filters
  • Improve presets

Pain + solution match: Alarm Management

Pain

Want to see if someone took ownership on an alarm.

Solution

  • New statuses
  • Alarm acknowledgment

Evaluation Research Methods

Moderated Sessions

5 moderated sessions of 90 min' each. UX designer demo, user feedback, scenarios, and voting.

5 Finger Activity

Each participant raised one to five fingers based on how much the enhancement will better his experience

Generative Feedback

Additional generative feedback from participants.

Research analysis process

1

Data Collection

Lay out all feedback in a Miro table divided to Flows, question, Participants. Thematical sticks color code: positive, negative, suggestion, scenarios, current usage, organization details, opportunities.

2

Clustering

Thematically color cluster in a table divided by flows, clustered themes.

3

Insights + Recommendation

Flows insights, Votes summery, Recommendations.

4

Next steps

Feature requests

Thematic Data Collection


Clustering


Insights & Recommendation


Research Outcomes

Participant Reactions

Participants provided valuable feedback and insights during the moderated sessions.

User Voting on Likelihood

Participants rated how likely they would be to use the proposed enhancements.

Participant Recommendations

Participants provided valuable recommendations for new feature requests.

Yearly product planning

UX & stakeholders plan next steps given the user feedback and effort estimation

MVP Workshop

Participants: Product, R&D, Dev

1

T-shirt size activity

on evaluated concept design

2

T-shirt size activity

on new feature request improvement according to the concept demo

3

Alarms flow development ROI vote

4

Dev + design yearly gunt

Research Impact

User Engagement

User participant feel heard.

Cross-Team Collaboration

Product team knows how to priorities the work. Better communication across teams.

Developer Buy-In

Developers are more commited and act with empty to the user.

Project Conclusion

Project is suspended. Priorities had changed and the focus had shifted to different directions.

UX Team Reaction

1

No Post-Mortem

No post mortem as UX organization changed.

2

Team Morale

Stronger together - team moral.

3

Moving On

Morn than move on.

Lesson Learned

Handoff Insights

Initiatives switch hands when different researchers change. It's important to dedicate time to learn prior research insights to ease the transition.

User-Centered Approach

We must instruct co-designers not to influence participants during evaluations. The design may be great, but we are not the users.

Prioritization

Gathering user insights on likelihood to use helps the product manager prioritize the most impactful solutions.

Collaboration

Collaboration is key - the UX team can bridge the gap between users, business, and development efforts.

Thank You!

For reading my case study :-)

Up