1.How did physically acting out help to explore ideas?

I found this form of idea exploration was a lot of fun. Beyond the hysterics we experienced as a group – and there were plenty – the real benefit I found was that it added a layer of human limit to the to the depth of exploration. As we were exploring how we could improve the experience of visiting the doctor’s office, we needed to understand the layout and positioning of potential users: where users sit, where signifiers should be positioned etc. The benefit of of bodystorming meant that we could visualise the potential solutions and acknowledge setbacks that would potentially be missed through two-dimensional ideation such as sketching or storyboarding.

2. Did you refine your ideas and solutions to the problem through bodystorming? In what way?

Yes, we managed to refine our ideas through props and running through a planned script. As we tested each stage of the script, we were able to identify issues that required further refinement.

3. What was difficult or challenging about bodystorming?

The most challenging aspect of this technique was both the limit of our collective imaginations and the limit of available resources to create props within the testing environment we created. In some instances we needed to imagine a constraint within the testing environment, such as a display indicating what position each user was in within the waiting line.

4. Does bodystorming lend itself to certain types of problems?

I believe that bodystorming has limitations in terms of the depths of exploration in to issues of design. In the case of our focus – improving the experience of going to the doctor’s office – we were only able to explore the macro level issues of design. This included the room shape, positioning of users, large visible affordances and signifiers ensuring users are aware of their interaction with the environment. Where bodystorming would become an issue would be the micro-level exploration of a design solution. Would a visible device improving interaction require language as the key conveyor of information or would more subtle signifiers be more appropriate, such as lights or unobtrusive directives. Bodystorming wouldn’t effectively be able to explore these issues without added layers of explorative techniques such as prototyping. It would be capable of discovering the need for the solution but not the capacity to explore the potential options within the solution itself.

Advertisements