IDEA9106 Design Thinking

Design is a state of mind



Amon6348 – Research report summary

This is my summary of the research. I did 8 interviews and created the Affinity diagram. I also did some observations at home of a gamer. I also got information from gartner group to see what experts say about how the market will look like in the next years . Some insights are how worried are people of face to face communication in the future and how almost everyone think of entertainment at home like the television. It was also very interesting that everyone wanted faster internet to stream media and security wasn’t a main issue due to the need of using technology, there was a case of identity theft who just accepted the situation.

Some people expressed their need for different kind of technology and quality/price.  Most of them have in common that they would like to know more about valuable products. So one of my ideas was a place (physical or online) to simply advise people on their technology needs. From a basic TV, latest video games to smart houses. The experience will be great for amateurs and very technical people. This gives free thought to other related ideas like how to offer the the service, how an user can hire it, for how long and quality of the advise. This should not be like reviews from magazines but the differentiator of independence, so probably a second set of volunteers would provide the advise, motivated by reputation.

Summary Poster

Blog 4 – amon6348 – Affinities

How did this exercise help you build empathy with prospective users?

The best way to create empathy with future users is understanding their needs, motivations, goals and frustrations. The interviews provided four different perspectives of what a trip is. However, by grouping relevant information it’s easy to see that they also share some of those characteristics. We can use that common ground to understand the main problems and gains to better approach them. Which allows more empathy with them.

How did this clustering of information help you understand user needs?

The selection of categories built bottom up made me realise important aspects of a trip that otherwise I would have considered granted or irrelevant, in both cases diminishing its importance. Having detected similar opinions across distinct people was a good exercise to make relevant information obvious. All this while looking at the whole and keeping the detail present.

What was difficult or challenging with the technique? How would you do it better next time?

It was difficult at first to understand the focus of the categories, but once we understood this point, it was easy to see what is important for the people in the interviews. Next time I would consider this from the beginning, even the step of extracting the important information, so we can obtain better results easier and quicker.

Blog 3 – amon6348 – Creating personas

1. Describe your experience of creating a single persona from different users’ perspectives gathered in the interview data. Was there enough commonality between the 4 people interviewed to form a coherent persona? Or would it have made more sense to create a second different persona?

We selected going to the cinema. The experience was very enriching. I noticed how a character can be created to represent a group of people’s preferences.  After having created it, I noticed that using this technique to group different possible users helps in designing by targeting requirements more easily. For this exercise we had enough common ground to create only 1 persona. This is particularly interesting given that the four of us have different background. We included characteristics like frequency

2. Do you think your final persona was successful in generating empathy with users? What would you change to make it better?

Although the image we produced does not really represent the description, I believe the persona we can definitely empathise with other similar people. A better sketch could ease the understanding of the profile and create more empathy with the users. The information provided is meaningful, short and easy to follow.

Blog 2 – amon6348 – Material iterations

1) How did working through different materials help you to explore and express potential solutions to a design problem? I noticed that each material offered different experiences and feelings as a user. I could explore ease of representation, speed with some of them but challenges with others due to the lack of time. With the cardboard I could easily represent the functional side of the design, but using the pipe cleaners it was easier to represent the shape, that with some more work could have been used for ergonomy. 2) What kinds of information and inspiration did the different materials give you? Did you have a favourite material? The cardboard gave the feeling of better support, very important for this case with some flexibility, but not too much comfort. Using the pipe cleaners was exactly the opposite, I could notice more flexibility in the design, but it didn’t show the stability required or the attributes of the design. The toothpick were very complicated for me to tie to each other, with little inspiration. 3) What did you change along the way? What did you learn from your prototypes? I changed the shape of the chair. Instead of having many curves, most of the prototypes had straight lines. 4) How well did you address your user needs in the various design models you created? The person is achy and it is difficult for him to sit on his chair, however he spends many hours sitting there. Ergonomic designs with proper support for the head were considered. However, it wasn’t clearly shown in all of them. Chairs look firm and stable for support. DSC_0318S1 week 2 - amon6348 - use caseDSC_0319 DSC_0320 DSC_0321 DSC_0322

Blog 1 – amon6348 – Gift-giving experience

  1. How did engaging with a real person, testing with a real person, change the direction your prototype took?

At the beginning there was no structure on what the outcome was going to be. By progressing on each step I felt how the options were reducing and how it was more clear what challenges needed to be faced to improve the gift experience. Because the iterations were quick and feedback was provided on the spot, it was very interesting to see that some of the ideas I had were not useful at all and I had focus on other details to really create something useful.

  1. What was it like showing unfinished work to another person?

It was really much appreciated as even at the prototype level some feedback was provided, which wasn’t possible until my partner interacted with my idea at up to some point. I can notice how easy it was to explain the idea without many words and getting good feedback.

  1. As a User, how did you interact with your partner’s level of lowly-resolved prototype; how did the level of resolution impact your experience as a user?

It was really amusing to see the idea and imagining being at the place and shopping. I could notice some feeling that didn’t show up until I saw the prototype.

  1. Design thinking is an iterative, self-directed process. Based on what you learned, what would you go back and do next? What would you do over again?

I would try to spread the time spent for empathising. I took the whole first interview instead of getting more information, so I lost an iteration. However, I can also tell that part of the decision was based on the lifestyle of my partner, so I noticed the importance of the activity itself.

  1. What principle, what tool would you infuse into the work tomorrow? Upload your answers to the blog and tag “Blog 1”, and your unikey.

Gaining empathy. Many times I don’t really consider the context of the stakeholders I liaise with and sometimes it takes me to solutions that could have had better impact with a few changes in the initial design. Prototyping is also a very good idea, but I’m not sure how far I can infuse it.

Prototype week 1
Prototype week 1

Create a free website or blog at

Up ↑