My wire framing process: from lo-fidelity to slightly higher fidelity

Last week, I built concept models of banks, the current state of the TD bank mobile app, and a future state of the app so that I could build background knowledge, make sense of complexity, and envision how to create a more usable application. This week, I began the process of redesigning the TD bank mobile application. The first step was to imagine how real people use the banking application. I imagined users with goals inspired by real people. I wrote scenarios that fleshed out their stories, and then drew storyboards that illustrated how they could use the app to fulfill their goals. The second step was to design wireframe flows that illustrated a journey a user could would take to fulfill their goal using the banking app.

What I learned last week

After immersing myself in the TD banking mobile app and imagining a better system, I knew that moving forward I wanted to keep a few key design principles in mind:

  • Keep the app simple – the current app has too many buttons that lead to the same place. This is unnecessary and confusing.
  • Keep the app visually minimal – there are screens in the current app that are too heavy with color and information. It is hard to know what different key screens are used for because my eyes don’t know where to look.
  • Make core functions more easily accessible – functions like check balance require 4 taps. There should be fewer taps to find this information.

Users, scenarios and storyboards

 I wrote about three potential users:

  • Louis, a junior in college who is living on his own for the first time;
  • Stephanie, a working mother who is also her household’s financial manager; and,
  • Clark, a freelance UX designer who has to manage many clients and subcontractors.

I brainstormed all the goals they may have and prioritized which goals were most important. Starting the app redesign here helped me to humanize the experience that followed. Whenever I got lost in the details, I could remember who I was designing the experience for. On a tactical level, it helped me to fill in fields with realistic data. On a systems level, when I had a question about hierarchy in terms of interactions and information, I could think back to my character and imagine it from their perspective.

Users and goals
Users and goals

I also believe that having clear character journeys in mind will help me to make sense of the critique I will be leading this evening. Though I will be asking my classmates to give feedback on how to make interactions more usable and hierarchy clearer, the core of my decision making will fall back on questions like, “What would Louis, a newbie to financial management and adult life decisions, need?” or “How will Stephanie use the features in the banking app to facilitate uncomfortable conversations with her less fiscally responsible husband?”

 

Once I had each character’s story written in detail, I made a spreadsheet with scenes and screens. It helped me to essentialize all of the details. What is the most salient idea I am expressing? What image would communicate the idea to a viewer? This helped me to narrow in big ideas. (So much of this design process is going from detail to big idea to detail!)

Scenarios, screens and scenes
Scenarios, screens and scenes

Then, I moved to storyboarding. This started the process of first, imagining how characters would realistically be using the banking app. How would they be standing? Where? And then, it served as a bridge to thinking about the interfaces. What would Stephanie want to do if another mother pays her back in the middle of the park with a check? What interactions would be fast and convenient for her?

Storyboards
Storyboards

Storyboards to wireframes

In the process of storyboarding, I started to build out wireframes. So much of the design process is working in the right level of fidelity for the stage of process you are working in. While storyboarding, I would draw a storyboard with less detail but would have the big idea. This would prompt moving to another sheet of paper where I would sketch the interface with more detail. It’s a cycle of fidelity. Storyboards have low fidelity but are filled with big ideas. They moved me to start thinking about all the details I needed which prompted me to think about details, spacing and hierarchy of the interface. So, I would sketch the interface and then the flow at a higher level of fidelity on a separate sheet of paper. But then I would return to the same (or different) storyboard to think about what the user would do next. What would help Clark keep his records most organized when transferring money to a subcontractor’s account?

Wireframe sketch
Wireframe sketch

Once I had one complete wireframe journey complete, I moved to designing my wireframes in sketch.

Wireframes in sketch

Below you will see each of the flows that I have developed so far.

The following flows are inspired by Louis. In the first flow, he starts a recurring bill pay to help manage his stress. He feels overwhelmed with all of the new ways he needs to “adult”.

Louis sets up his first recurring bill.
Louis sets up his first recurring bill.

Louis finds out he made a mistake when he set up his bill because he missed a payment. So he has to view what he did and change when the bill is set to pay.

Louis views and changes his recurring bill.
Louis views and changes his recurring bill.

Louis is out with his friends. They want to see a movie but he doesn’t have any cash. So, he sends his friend money electronically.

Louis pays his friend.
Louis pays his friend.

The following flows are inspired by Stephanie. In the first wireframe journey, Stephanie is notified that she and her husband have overdrawn their checking account. She checks her balance.

Stephanie checks her balance.
Stephanie checks her balance.

Stephanie wants to set up a notification for her and her husband so that they know when their checking account will hit $500.

Stephanie sets up a notification.
Stephanie sets up a notification.

Stephanie gets a check from a friend in the middle of a party. She wants to deposit it.

Stephanie deposits a check.
Stephanie deposits a check.

Stephanie wants to transfer some extra funds into her daughter’s college account.

Stephanie transfers funds.
Stephanie transfers funds.

Next steps

First, I need to finish making every screen in my system. Second, I will go out into the field and get feedback from real users. I can’t wait to hear what they say!

Why Design Thinking Ability is more than an Auxiliary Skill

The above video is a story simulating the beneficial outcomes of design thinking being taught in school. But the implications of increasing design literacy carries far more weight than just solving problems at an amusement park.

What if design thinking was a subject available to everyone? It would be taught in schools and treated as a discipline in it’s own right with it’s own set of skills – those of prototyping, creative thinking, ideation, inquiry, evaluation, and sketching. Everyone has the ability to learn these skills and the world would be better off with a more design literate population.

The ability to use design thinking to solve contemporary problems is incredibly important, because the types of problems design thinking works best for are the same ones the world suffers from the most. Disparity in education, poverty, and healthcare are examples of the complex, systemic problems we face and they are riddled with interwoven root causes.

The designer is perfectly positioned to solve for these types of problems, for she has been trained in the ability to think laterally and cut across patterns to develop solutions.

Each one of these systemic, or wicked, problems encompasses a unique situation, and must be approached artistically. The designer layers her knowledge of multiple subjects across the situation, blends in her intuition, and begins to define the problem as she solutions.

Let us not forget, these problems are human centric and necessitate input from the recipients living within the problem space. These large societal problems have no correct solution, but in order for a designer to devise a good solution, she must rely upon the experiences and knowledge of the situation’s human experts.

Additionally, the fact that these problems are human centric means that all proposed solutions will constantly need to be adapted to account for unexpectedness or change in human behavior. Solutions will require iteration and continual re-solving, so the designer will never run out of problems to solve for.

If we were to devise a world in which design ability was taught as a primary liberal art, then the master designer could more easily be assisted by the insights and experiences of a design literate populous. This would create stronger, more powerful solutions to the wicked problems that beset us all.

Teaching Theory at AC4D

“Great timing,” I think to myself yet again. As I was preparing the deck I would use that evening to facilitate a discussion on the opportunities of (social) entrepreneurship, I discovered that a vote by the Texas House of Representatives the previous day had “set the table” for Uber’s return to Austin. (Uber stopped providing rides in Austin a year ago in protest of required driver background checks.) Already in the deck were quotes I had taken from “The sharing economy is a lie: Uber, Ayn Rand and the truth about tech and libertarians,” one of the readings I had assigned for that evening. Also already there were tweets and (other) references to other articles about Uber, some positive, most negative. Into the deck went the headline about the legislature’s vote and a few words from the online article.

Serendipitously encountering tweets, articles, and other information pertinent to a class shortly before the class was typical for me, since I follow people on social media who care about the things I care about and teach about. And I often took advantage of that. I had previously added to the above-referenced deck — which I’ve made available in its entirety here — images from two recent articles I encountered via Twitter about Walmart, including one entitled “Business Exists To Serve Society,” words somewhat surprisingly uttered by Walmart’s Chief Sustainability Officer during a recent interview; we watched that interview during class, since it was of great relevance to arguments made by Michael Porter and Mark Kramer in another of the readings I had assigned for that evening, “Creating Shared Value.” That same day, I noticed on Facebook that a former colleague of mine, David Rose, was in town; I had shown a video about David and read a bit from his book, “Enchanted Objects” the previous week in class during another section of the course, and since David was a serial entrepreneur, a guest appearance would be a nice fit for this section of the course as well, so I made it happen.

All of this (and much more) was for an advanced theory course on interaction design and social entrepreneurship that I taught during March and April of this year at the Austin Center for Design (AC4D). Assigned readings included articles — often long and sometimes complex — by renown authors on theory about or of relevance to design and entrepreneurship as well as articles — often more recent and shorter — facilitating the understanding of theory and its relevance to design and entrepreneurial practice today. (All of the assigned readings are listed in a deck you can access here; they might also — depending on when you are reading this — still be listed on the course’s webpage.) The course is one of three that all students take during the final quarter of the AC4D educational program.

Teaching this course was a wonderful experience due in large part to the wonderful students. Each class featured great and often impassioned discussion, and student presentations, each synthesizing designated readings in a personally meaningful way, were always special. One of Sally Hall’s very creative presentations consisted largely of a board game she designed that “follows the development of a non-profit organization working to increase access to education among low-income individuals in Managua, Nicaragua”; the game (being played in the photo below) was designed to help players understand and “explore the complexities of social impact.” One of Kelsey Willard’s presentations was a scary story about the impact of the coming singularity told, appropriately, over a campfire (see photo below). Our examination of power relationships prompted Elijah Parker to share information about his life he had never before felt comfortable sharing. The same examination prompted Conner Drew to explicitly formulate a set of personal design ethics and to call on others to do the same. And repeatedly, Garrett Bonfanti effectively highlighted just how important the role of the designer has become.

blogphoto2

I’ve taught lots — inside of companies, via educational institutions, and at professional conferences — with much of my teaching focused on practical skills. General Assembly — where I taught the 10-week, full-time User Experience Design Immersive course several times — is among the up-start organizations claiming that intensive programs focused on teaching practical skills in the context of multiple, real-world projects prepare students for the workplace much better than much longer, more traditional, and much more expensive academic programs. While that is often true, AC4D Founder Jon Kolko has articulated the importance of teaching theory:

Our curriculum at Austin Center for Design is rich with design theory. Students take theory classes that focus on the social and political relationships between design and the culture of society. Students learn theory and discourse related to designing for the public sector, specifically as it relates to ill-defined problem solving and the ethical obligations of designers. They read complex articles from computer scientists, psychologists, and sociologists, and they build arguments that synthesize these articles into new ideas.

Yet the program at Austin Center for Design is a practitioner program, and these students go on to be practicing designers, not academics. They work for big brands, for consultancies, and in startups — and increasingly, they start their own entrepreneurial endeavors. They aren’t pursuing a Ph.D. path, so why teach theory? Why waste precious class time on academic discourse, rather than practical skills?

I’ve thought a lot about what makes a great designer. One of the qualities is craft and immediacy with material. That’s sort of obvious — someone who makes things needs to be good at making things. I’m convinced that theory is also a key ingredient to greatness, a key part of claiming to be a competent, professional designer, but it’s less obvious than methods or skills and is often ignored during design education. There are at least three reasons I think students need theory as part of their foundational design education:

  • Theory give students the basis for a “process opinion.” …
  • Theory give students the ability to think beyond a single design problem, in order to develop higher-order organizing principles. …
  • Theory give students a sense of purpose, a reason for doing their work. …

We’re seeing an influx of design programs aimed at practitioners, programs that intend to increase the number of designers available to work in the increasingly complex technological landscape. I’m skeptical of programs that don’t include theory in their curriculum. It has been argued that vocational programs should focus on core skills and ignore the larger academic, theoretical subject matter. I would argue the opposite. It is the vocational programs that require this thoughtful context the most, as graduates from these programs will have a direct impact on the products and services that shape our world.

I agree with Jon (and with the students who voiced additional benefits from studying theory), and whenever I taught for General Assembly, I made sure to include some theory. However, I was delighted to have the opportunity to dive more deeply via teaching at AC4D.

My thanks to: Jon and to Kevin McDonald who, before the course, shared invaluable information with me about when they had taught the course in the past; Lauren Serota, Adam Chasen, Mini Kahlon, Ed Park, and David Rose for their guest in-person appearances; Daniela Papi-Thornton, Paul Polak, Harry Brignull, Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Jake Solomon, Ricky Gervais, Brian Goldman, Jeff Benabio, Don Norman, Sean Follmer, David Rose, Jared Ficklin, Stephen Colbert, Sally Hall, Pelle Ehn, Kathleen McLaughlin, John Battelle, Jess McMullin, The Police, and a few others whose names I don’t know who appeared on video; and the many authors of tweets and of articles other than those I assigned that I referenced during the course.

The course ended just last week, but I greatly miss teaching it already. I am very happy to have become a part of the AC4D community.

Theory Final – Larry the Lobster

For our last project in theory we were asked to read 6 articles from a variety of designers that discussed what is involved with being a designer as well as the process of design.

We live in a time where design is maturing into a discipline which is being recognized to stand alone. Design is gaining more of a seat at the table if you will and influencing companies and organization from the ‘C’ level. This is partially due to the fact that design is being recognized as a universal and flexible solution to a number of problems. Design firms such as IDEO and Frog are helping push this understanding into the public.

Richard Buchanan argues that “design problems are ‘indeterminate’ and ‘wicked’ because design has no special subject matter on its own apart from what the design conceives it to be. Subject matter is potentially universal in scope, because it could be applied to any area of the human experience. But in the process of application the designer must discover or invent a particular subject out of the problems and issues of the specific circumstance.” This brings up an interesting topic of whether or not design is its own discipline due to the fact that it is 100% dependent on other subject matter. I would side with the fact that this argument facilitates design being it’s own discipline even more so since it can be so ubiquitously applied.

Jocelyn Wyatt take an approach to explaining design thinking targeted towards those who don’t have much exposure to design. To break it down to assist these individuals to get on board with design thinking she describes it as three spaces to avoid direct linearity: inspiration, ideation, and implementation. Inspiration is the space of identifying an opportunity where a potential solution could be applied to improve a problem. Ideation is the process of generating, developing and testing ideas. Implementation is the path that leads from the project stage into people’s lives. The primary purpose of breaking down the definition of design thinking in this way is to prevent process focused individuals from picking apart the fact that design thinking is not concrete.

Chris Pacione takes a similar stance as Jocelyn in the fact that by breaking down complex topics, in this case design thinking, into a digestible format that it affords the idea of establishing design thinking to be as ubiquitous as mathematics. He states, “design is too important to be left to designers.” I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. By having a basic understanding of design thinking it would allow people to thrive in a day to day experience. This is due to the fact that the skills design thinking would provide would allow people to step back and ask why more consistently. They would start to pick apart why the way things are and inherently want to improve them.

Nigel Cross explains that a level of intuition is how design research can make broad generalization with a small sample. After all design research isn’t trying to predict behavior, but it attempts to empathize behavior. Along these lines the intent of the design process is to make something new, and by doing so you help change the problem, not just solve it. He also discusses the idea that design has to happen in real time, you can’t read it but you have to do it. This provides an incremental build up into something “magical” that doesn’t happen instantly. This is the reason why it’s called a process.

Edward De Bono primarily discusses process and acknowledging the default way the brain operates does not afford creative thinking, which is where this magic can happen. This creative thinking is also referred to as lateral thinking, in contrast to linear thinking. The logical part of the mind is based on what it’s seen before which prevents opportunity. One of the more simple ways De Bono proposes to get around this limitation is the use of a random word. The idea is to apply a random word into the problem space, regardless of how crazy it feels or how it doesn’t make sense. This generates a new frame around the situation that normally wouldn’t have been explored. The random word works because it is genuinely abductive. After the application of lateral thinking he argues that a valuable idea will be logical in hindsight, but needs a catalyst to arrive there.

To summarize these points of view around design thinking, I’ve created a video. Please enjoy.

Technology: Strange v Familiar

This few weeks we have focused on the concept of technology being strange, yet familiar. Technologies and it’s rapid growth in conceptualization to market, far outseeds the Moore’s law already.

Is this a good thing? Is it a bad thing, does higher access to civilians make our lives more like a sci-fi film? Or make us better or smarter human beings? Or dumber… or have no affect at all?

Through all the readings I got a sense that the authors had also thought about this, and from one extreme to the next, one author Bell, felt that we should chill out on getting gadgety with domestic technology. Such as the internet tv in the refrigerator, because there could possibly be a place in your brain that could come up with a design solution to not have to have the user completely loose touch with the reality that makes us, well – human.

Not that technology is bad by any means, but choose wisely is what I got from her article. The power the designer has to influence those who interact with our “stuff” can be good, bad, or perhaps even worse, indifferent.

To illustrate this I used a 2×2 with the axis being: y axis – user controlled v technology controlled, and the x axis being the designers intent to make humans use more cognitive skills and become more intelligent, or less cognitive skills and become perhaps not dumber, but not any more intelligent by any means.

strange&familiar.001

 

Our Authors:strange&familiar.002

The base for my discussion of the writings:strange&familiar.003 strange&familiar.004

I believe Bell fell between the technology being in control (if the future of design were to go the way she had explained) and this technology not making us human any smarter. But perhaps just making our lives easier by default of not having to think for ourselves.
strange&familiar.005 strange&familiar.006

I put Sterling right in the middle of not learning or getting dumber, but at least having more user control over our situation. Although our cultures may be different it doesn’t mean we wish to have different outputs in using the technology given to us.
strange&familiar.007 strange&familiar.008

Marsden was interesting to me for the sheer fact that his article dealt with such a real life situation. I placed him in an area where yes actually the user was getting more tech savy by shear means of having to learn to use the broken platform that was provided, but the user was still under the thumb of the reach of the technology provided, limited, yet aware.strange&familiar.009 strange&familiar.010

And then there is Kerweil the futurist whom I believe threw out Moore’s law a long time ago and believes that humans will actually be controlled by the robots we built in 200 years. He may be right. You never know.
strange&familiar.011

Lastly I would like to leave with one thought that persisted throughout these readings. That we can not stop the progression of technology and how it impacts each person in each culture differently for better or worse. But as designers, we have the obligation to not only fulfill the need of the consumer, but also not go so overboard that we are actually making them less intelligent. There is a difference between a Roomba and an Internet ready TV screen on a refrigerator. The Roomba makes my life easier by keeping the floor clean, but it doesn’t solve my math homework, or tell me how to cook my grandmother’s recipes. 

The world has enough fluff widgetery. Let’s make some real design. 









 

Iterations & Ideals

I want to introduce you to a story of the last 24 weeks of my life, introduce you to the individuals that I have met along the way, show you the places I have visited and how I learned the most powerful lesson of the entire year was the power of THE story and the ability and genuine curiosity and bravery to ask each individual tell me their story… to please keep talking. 

My focus was initially on the dealing with the issues surrounding healthcare, but through contextual inquiry found that access and the stigma surrounding mental healthcare was a much bigger problem, as it has been defunded completely by the government and left to individual philanthropist and donors to open facilities to help those who actually need help. 

I found AC4D as my opportunity put something good out into the world. My final product was inspired and dedicate to my father, whom I had barely a relationship with at all really. My father suffered from a depression that I don’t think anyone could understand, was truly stubborn, and never received any help for his condition. 

Looking back and having conversations with my mother I realized as an adult things that I completely did not acknowledge or understand as a child. How does an impoverished family of 5 living in a town of around 1000 people located 60 miles to the nearest hospital where you can birth a child deal with healthcare, let alone mental healthcare? 

That was the question and I went to find the answer. I initially went back to my hometown to do some detective work on the issues surrounding mental health in rural text. The last 24 weeks I’ve been interviewing, researching, building and creating life long friendships all with the purpose to create a “thing” that would help low income or non insured individuals living in extreme rural areas. My product first and foremost had to not rely on any individuals personal access to technology. Then meet the design insights and pillars I had established from my research. 

insights:implication.001

When it was time to begin actually producing a thing, I knew it would be a “journey kit’  of sorts that included both stories from individuals dealing with similar situations living with a mental illness, as well as a 2 week starter pill pack or holder. 

In interaction design iteration is the heart of everything you do. You create, test your creation, then iterate on the feedback to make it better. 

Do date my product has gone through I believe 6 iterations now. 4 of which I prototyped out

Q3_presentation.001 Q3_presentation.002 Q3_presentation.003 Q3_presentation.004 Q3_presentation.005 Q3_presentation.006 Q3_presentation.007 Q3_presentation.008 Q3_presentation.009

Placing all these iterations against my design pillars and user testing responses, I found that the power of the human story plus a plan of attack for medication regimen would be the most effective tool. But something that is very easy to understand, inexpensive to produce, familiar enough to not be foreign or strange but interesting enough to insight curiosity and interaction.

My thoughts went back to one of my home interviews where this woman had 3 separate pill boxes, the Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday types, and in a brain storming session one of professors threw out an idea – what if it’s a dip can and eureka. I could craft a round pill box  that includes a small mp3 player in the center with headphones.

Each time the “wheel” is turned exposing the medication, the user can put on the headphones and press play to hear the story that identifies with that days progression in the 2 week cycle.

Click to watch animation and hear sample audio

welcome

instructions

top

I tried to stay true to my design pillars, and to the core values that I tried to keep true to. My idea is that these would be distributed to MHMR centers, the centers that give psychiatric council and prescribe medication to individuals who are on medicare, medicaid or no insurance at all. 

I stayed silent to long in dealing with facing the difficult issues surrounding a low income family members mental health, so hopefully going forward my product may inspire behavior change to even the most stubborn individual. 

PKT.001

The Final Presentation.

AC4D set up the final presentation as a sort of museum situation where the public was invited and it was an interactive experience where people could see your entire process from start to finish.

My station included my research, my insights, my design pillars, ALL my prototype iterations. And the actual final functioning prototype, as well as a listening station where people could hear various short stories that went along with the program.

IMG_4598
IMG_4613 IMG_4600 IMG_4603 IMG_4607 IMG_4608 IMG_4609 IMG_4610 IMG_4604 IMG_4612

Summit: Pay it down while you live it up

“I’d like to pay off my credit cards as soon as possible because it is a cloud, it is something hanging over my head.”
–Carl, 32

Debt can be intensely anxiety provoking and yet we saw over and over again in our research that although the young people we spoke with recognize that their financial situation is causing them stress, and could be detrimental to their future, they continue to struggle to change their day to day spending behaviors enough to pay down their debt. Why is it so difficult for people to change their behavior when it comes to money? Why aren’t all of the myriad of existing tools addressing this problem?

 

Satisfaction Happens Now + Fear of Missing Out

Over the last six months, through a dozen in-depth interviews, intercepts and prototype testing, we’ve gained a deeper understanding of how young adults think about their finances, how they feel about their debt, and how they manage their current financial situation.

Blog_ResearchParticipants_Debt

 

Through our research two things became very clear:

1. There is no satisfaction in future benefits. We need to feel immediate value to be satisfied.

2. We want to make good decisions but fear sacrificing more than necessary.

“In the moment of choosing to buy something or not, it’s really easy to make that decision– yeah fuck it, I don’t care– I want this now, and then, oh I have to rein it in now, I have to pay this off.”
–Carl, 24

 

We found that people will make a budget or a plan at the beginning of the month — often using budgeting apps like Mint — in order to get their spending under control, but once they are confronted with daily spending decisions like whether to eat out for lunch or go out with friends, their budget goes out the window. There is a huge opportunity to create a solution that bridges this gap between long term goals and day-to-day spending.

 

Introducing Summit: Pay It Down While You Live It Up

Summit is a financial app that sends users friendly, contextually appropriate messages inviting them to send a little extra money from their checking account to the card they want to pay off, making paying off debt a daily activity just like spending.

Blog_HowSummitWorks
Summit Gets Personal

Summit leverages individual’s spending habits in order to choose the best times to send personally relevant messages inviting them to put money towards their debt.

Blog_MorningJavaMessage
Summit Reduces Anxiety

Looking at a large credit card balance can be overwhelming. That’s why Summit breaks down the user’s long term goal of paying down your debt into small manageable chunks, all while helping decrease the amount of time they’ll be paying their debt.

 

Experience Summit: Click on the image below to get a preview of interacting with the Summit app

Blog_IdealStateClickable

But…does it work?

Summit promises its users to reduce the anxiety caused by credit card debt and empower them to change their behavior and achieve a better financial future, but what is it like to use day after day?. In order to find out, we ran a small pilot using existing technologies to test Summit’s core interaction: sending users daily messages that allow them to put money towards their debt.

We piloted with 7 individuals over 4 weeks and sent a total of 124 messages– paying an extra $388 over people’s minimum payments.

Summit_Pilot
Before our pilot, we calculated how long it would take each of our participants to pay off their credit cards and how much interested they would end up paying based on their current monthly payments. At the conclusion of our pilot we ran the numbers again to see what effect, if any, our service had, and what effect it would have if they continued at this new rate.

 

The results were exciting:

Summit_BeforeAfter

Not only did everyone pay more than their minimum payment this month, but if they were to continue to use Summit, on average they would pay off their debt over 2 years earlier and save over $800!

 

Behavior Change

Beyond saving our users money and years of indebtedness, we also strive to help users change their spending behaviors so they eventually won’t need our service. After our pilot we spoke to all of our participants and asked them if using our service had changed the way they spent money that month.

One of our participants, Jacob, told us about a message he received just before lunch one day. He had brought his lunch to work that day — something he had been trying to do more often to save money — but that morning his friends decided they were going to go out for lunch and invited Jordan along. Even though he had packed a lunch he decided he was going to leave it in the fridge and go with them. As lunch time, approached he received a message from Summit asking him to put $7 towards his credit card debt which he accepted. As he put that money towards his debt, he decided to keep the positive momentum going and eat the lunch he brought.

This is the behavior change Summit seeks to bolster. Keeping long term goals top of mind and creating a cycle of small successes that helps people create their own positive financial future.

 

Going Forward

Going forward as we develop and launch Summit we will be looking for strategic partners who can help us make it a success. Our strengths are in understanding our users and telling stories, and will be looking for people with technical, financial and industry experience to work withus to make Summit a reality.

The Summit Team,
Samara Watkiss, Jeff Patton & Lauren Segapeli

——-

(Click below to experience the pilot)
Screen Shot 2015-04-17 at 11.45.09 AM

User Centered design gone wrong

This past week we read 3 articles, by three different authors. Jon Kolko’s: Our Misguided Focus on Brand and User Experience A pursuit of a “total user experience” has derailed the creative pursuits of the Fortune 500., Michael Hobbes’: Stop Trying to Save the World Big ideas are destroying international development, and Aneel Karnani’s: Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: A Mirage How the private sector can help alleviate poverty.

In each article I believe that each author was trying to tell the story of how true user centered interaction design went wrong. Whether it be by big business basically creating their own definition for user centered design to appease their unwillingness to change, or as Karnani did, calling out an actual individual name CK Prahalad for trying his hand at user centered design and failing.

I decided to create an infographic artifact to illustrate my take on these three articles.

IDSE302_Theory_Assignment_1_Watson

Creating the right pilot: Trust your gut, focus on the ideal

This week I waited for my recordable greeting card to come in the mail. Anticipating that the idea was to establish a conversation with individuals, via a pen pal type situation, recording reactions and reflections that were then sent back to the first user, then to another individual to reflect or react to by recording a verbal message.  I would then use contextual inquiry to identify if this back and forth conversation (revolving around the stigma of mental illness) was helpful for the initial user in disseminating the stigma that they had to keep their condition a secret, and to be more comfortable speaking out and owning their condition, because they were at least virtually interacting with others that could identify with their emotional state on a personal level.

Unfortunately, the card did not come in, but during this time of waiting for the card to come in the mail, I was challenged with the opportunity to take a step back and ask if this was really the correct way to pilot my ideal final product. Which is a 2 week trial pack of a mood disorder medication, which included recorded stories of others who have similar conditions and how they deal with emotion, medicaiton, and manage self care. As of now I can only equate my final ideal product to the idea to those voice recorded Hallmark story books, where a child can be told a bedtime story by a loved one who may live across the country.

Yet as I was waiting for my order to come in, to pilot my idea, I had in the back of my mind that this is not the correct pilot, I just felt it in my gut. My ideal end product is actually not necessarily a back and forth conversation as the initial pilot would suggest, but a book of real people with real stories about how they felt and dealt with issues surrounding their life before a diagnosis. Then how they felt and managed getting a diagnosis, being prescribed medication, and how they felt with the idea that they may have to maintain a medication regimen perhaps for the rest of their life.

I did not believe in my first pilot idea, so I went with my gut and started gathering stories, from real people in their own words. That is what I wanted in the first place and admittedly should have spent the past week gathering these stories.

The past being the past it, was time to get to work. I created a script of questions and recruited 2 individuals to interview and record in order to deliver these stories to someone who may be hesitant to seek help, whether by stigma or general fear of a diagnosis that required them to potentially take a medication that helped them reach self-care in the long term, possibly for the rest of their lives.

This is what I did today. Surprisingly people who suffer from a mood disorder (bipolar spectrum or depression) understand what the condition is like and are more than willing to share their own stories if it has the potential to help release the stigma of being the odd man out, or the damaged ones, as well as put them at ease about the idea of having to be medicated in the long term in order to reach the goal in life they seek.

I also learned the importance of getting this information out of the computer and on to the “wall”. The wall being a place where you can visualize your journey and ideas, inspirations and wishes that you can physically look at and see on a daily basis. This allows you to be able to see where you have been, where you are going, and where you want to be. To iterate, and I acknowledge I should have done this sooner. I should have trusted my gut.

Out of respect of the two individuals I will not post the recordings until next week when I am able to edit down to the core ideals I am initially going to pilot, to a new “patient” with the same hope that it will aid in creating a virtual bond with my recorded individuals and their experiences in hopes that the stigma of being judged as the damaged one, as well as the realization that it is ok, and rather normal, often rather necessary, to seek aid of a medication regimen is not weird, or uncommon.

My pilot has changed. I now have the necessary stories/tools to relay to someone who may be feeling like they are “not normal”, but being not normal is actually ok with the appropriate treatment. Some of the greatest minds of our time have been “not normal”, and have gone on to make a true effect on changing the world.

I truly was fascinated and inspired by hearing others give their trust and conviction in helping others by revealing their personal information on tape. I appreciate the community that is willing to speak out about 1 in 4 people you may walk past on the streets where you live each day that manage and thrive some sort of mood disorder, but still having a program to not only reflect on their own actions themselves, but also be the crafters of some of the most insightful realizations about the world we live in at the same time.

Diagnosis : The Chemistry of Affliction

What is your diagnosis? What is one good thing that happened to you this week?

That is how where my story begins – today.

In doing my prototype testing and scenario validation, I have been getting close with a group of folks. The people change week to week but the introductions are always the same, the explanation of what is to come is always the same. That is comforting in a way. A re-enforcement of some stability or normalcy before the next 2 hours of guided sometimes hard to hear, dialogue. I ask questions, and feel really grateful to get honest answers to my questions.

There is a relief that I have observed from people hearing other people’s stories, however mundane. Even if it is just about what the best meal they ate that week comes. There is a sincere connection from individuals who really do not know each other at all outside of the context of that room.

So again, where is my project my “thing” today? Re-capping from last week when I scrapped the concept of the advent calendar, and decided to test out my book of stories and activities that revolve around adherence to a medication program. I made some scenarios, and I showed the book to a few people and got some feedback that “man, that is a lot of words, and a lot of writing”. Which got me thinking yeah… the people that I have been interviewing and working with for the past 3 weeks who may not be able to get out of bed for a week, and who haven’t even been able to have a job for years might not be into.

When you are in a state of being down, from my personal experience even, I don’t want to do anything. I want to watch TV, I will listen to Radiolab for hours but I can’t read, I don’t want to read. I may want to write but I actually asked the question in my last session how the group felt about “homework” and WOW the reaction was f-no I’m not doing homework.

So that a little bit blew my “fun activities” along with stories as therapy for people with mental illness in west Texas needed to evolve.

How do you get the warmth of the sharing stories with another human in a totally individually packaged analogue package.

Pat, a professor here at AC4D threw out the idea of those talking greeting cards and EUREAKA! I can do this! I can bring the technology to the patient. Rather than relying on the assumption that someone possibly in the middle of nowhere has high-speed wi-fi or even cell phone connection, or even a TV. I can use these little devices to bring a persons story into their home.

So I rush out to destroy some Hallmark “tell me a story” books and recordable photo frames and greeting cards and began figuring out how they worked. The book is quite clever, it works by a series of light sensitive triggers that when exposed will playback a pre-recorded story. A different sentence by turning the page and exposing a new sensor to light by a hold in the side of the page.

IMG_4286 IMG_4287 IMG_4288 IMG_4289 IMG_4291 IMG_4292 IMG_4293 IMG_4294 IMG_4295 IMG_4296

The card and the photo frame works by pressing a button to record, and then another button to play.

This week is a week of discovery. I want to introduce to isolated individuals the same feeling of being in a space with others like them. To use these technologies to connect perhaps someone alone in west Texas the opportunity to hear the stories of others from their mouths, with their inflections, stutters, hesitations and emotion to connect them through voice, with a little widget that cost probably 2 bucks to build.

This week is a week of definition of purpose, of order and specificity of content, iterating the medication regimen in the narrative, and finding that carrot that keeps the patient going. That keeps them excited about following through to the end. The book is still my book, just being spoken to the patient rather than the patient having to read the story themselves.

Activities for the week:

  1. New scenarios with this technology integration.
  2. Test scenarios.
  3. Develop a succinct description of my service.
  4. Plan out content in order or appearance.
  5. Play with technology.