Writing a requirements statement was a good way to start this week. There are a lot of subjects to cover in 4 days and being able to figure out exactly how to go about it was very beneficial. I enjoyed doing the exercise because we were asked to work in groups so to have a fresh set of eyes look at my project produced some answers that I had previously overlooked. I was paired with Robin and we broke the statement down into 6 main questions:
What is it?
What does it do?
Who is it for?
When/how are they going it use it?
What are the benefits/KSP?
What key constraints/limitations need to be taken account of?
By answering these, Robin and I were able to come up with a simplified requirements statement that covered all the main criteria. I always find it easier to follow a list of things to include, a bit like a to-do list, because my mind regularly goes off on a tangent when trying to write. We also looked at how to identify risk within a project. A good way to do this is to first assess the risk itself and think “what type of risk is this?”. Then, think about “what level of risk is this?”. Once these have been assessed, a minimisation strategy should be put in place to ensure the likely hood of this happening is at its absolute minimum. Lastly, as a ‘plan B’ type scenario, make a mitigation strategy for the reduction of the effect this may cause on the project.
As the final task of the morning, we started on the subject of decomposition of a problem. To get us thinking in the right way we were given a project brief.
“I want to create an image browser app that allows me to easily tag images and then to browse images by tag or combination of tags.”
Still partnered with Robin, we were told to take into consideration what functionalities the app may have. We thought the best way to display our thoughts was in the form of a mind-map. I find it a lot easier to visualise my thoughts using paper and pen in these types of situations because I can write down exactly what I need to, where ever I want on the page. This also enables me to find links between different thought processes I have and view a ‘bigger picture’. This is the mind-map we came up with:
Due to our short time frame, we were only able to look at 4 aspects of the app. As you can see from the image above these were browsing, adding a tag, viewing the images and where the images come from. By breaking down the app idea into its core functionalities we could start to see a bigger picture of what the key requirements were. I especially enjoyed this way of dissecting an idea because I never really know where to start when I want to try and include everything.
In the afternoon session, we used the same technique on our own project. I worked with Jason during this exercise because we could give each other ideas from a specific UX perspective. We decided to ask each other the same questions but write down our own answer for it in relation to our project and these are what the bullet points relate to. The main 2 pointers we always referred back to were “What does the user want?” and then from this, we could think “What are we going to prototype?”. Thinking about the problem logically and again, breaking down the problem into its core issues really laid out the main things I needed to focus on. Interestingly, using this method helped me to come up with a possible layout idea for the information this way which is a perfect example of how using different thought process techniques can open up creative thought processes.
Later in the week had my first official meeting with Tigger from The Greenhouse Trust. This was such a brilliant experience to have because I finally felt like the project had its professional flare as intended from the start. It really kicked in for me that we are working with real-life clients who have real needs that have to be satisfied. Tigger was extremely helpful and with only a little bit of nudging for answers I was able to get a lot of useful information. I used the questionnaire guideline provided to us from Jamie last week and this proved to tick a lot of boxes. Luckily he was very open for conversation and I managed to sit down with him for 30 minutes rather than 20. This is how the meeting panned out:
1) What is the website for? – Specific objectives for requirements statements.
- He wants people to come to the cafe. It is to be advertised strongly as an open place for everyone to come and enjoy food, drink and socialising.
- Customers should be able to find out about its amenities such as the garden, the books they sell and the artwork they showcase.
- The Greenhouse Trust website is a signpost for the companies who are advertised on the right-hand side of the home page. These comprise of campaigns and educational trusts.
- Networking and bringing people of different backgrounds and professions together to cater for a common goal. For example, if an environmentalist is passionate about soil and artists is looking for inspiration for a landscape painting, they might want to do a collaboration.
- Inform users of products sold in store along with relevant product information.
- They want to be able to provide enough information about a range of subjects so people in other professions are able to broaden their knowledge.
2) Who is the website for? Who are the users?
- The website used to be popular among activists, supporters and environmentalists, however, the target audience is blurred now as the website has had less and less attention.
- They want to appeal to artists, writers, scientists about climate change.
- Young or unestablished artists who want to get in touch with or get their art seen by older, more experienced artists.
3) Current website – love/hate? Why?
Like
- The look of it
- Quirky, arty, simple
- The quality and quantity of content. This gets people interested in the building and can turn an online presence into a real visit
Dislike
- Hard to navigate
- Out of date information
- The design is dated and could be a lot simpler for new users
- Content is hidden amongst other information and can be really hard to find
4) Optional – “I can’t promise you anything but if you could add two extra bits, what would they be?”
A page dedicated to a workshop event they are holding to invite women to talk about feminism. Women would be able to write about their opinions and experiences.
Finally, to finish off the week I had a chat with my tutor about the meeting with Tigger and how I plan to move forward. I am in a comfortable place and have a clear vision of what I need to complete before I start prototyping next week. The only thing I will really need to put a lot of thought into is the survey questions. I need to be able to word it so I get the right information out of the user groups and there is a great possibility that I don’t get all the information I need. Hopefully, the information gap won’t be too large and I can make do with subsidising some additional input. I will be spending the rest of the week thinking these through carefully before I release it to the public.