Archive for May, 2009

Choosing better expert participants for user research

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Needing Experts

Last Saturday down in Washington DC at redUXdc, Dave Cooksey gave a great presentation and part of his talk centered on cardsorting using Delphi techniques. Dave emphasized that the technique should be used with participants who are experts.

In his abbreviated talk Dave didn’t go into how to ensure that you have an expert participant for cardsorting. If the methods that you are using presume using expert users (or at least users with domain knowledge) then to increase the validity of your results you should try to qualify your participants.

Finding Experts

User Centered Design, UCD, is centered on users. But that shouldn’t mean any users, as much as possible it should be the right users, experts users in the domain you are investigating. UCD methods without users means almost nothing, with the wrong users you could think you are right, but with the wrong users.

We need to be better about finding or qualifying people who we test or research. Here are 3 simple tricks you might use to help select better participants.

  • Give them a short test of three  or five questions about the domain. It might be knowledge of certain financial terms for a 401K website, of certain garden pests for a seed website, or of Fast & Furious movie facts for a auto enthusiasts website. Only accept those with a certain number of right answers.  (It is even possible to do this without pre-determined “right” answers using cultural consensus modeling.)
  • Ask them to rate themselves on a scale of one to ten. If they rate themselves below a certain number they don’t recruit them. (A issue is confounding their expertise with their ability to self-evaluate.)
  • Ask them to recommend other people who they think are experts. Contact those people. (A very sophisticated method of doing this uses network analysis in which you contact those experts who are identified by numerous other people.)

In much of the work I have done I have always found the best investment of time and resources was in recruiting and screening (sometimes coming under the general method of sampling.) If you have really knowledgeable participants you can sometimes get by with less than stellar questions or inexperienced interviewers/researchers. But the reverse doesn’t seem to be true, even with the best questions and top-notch interviewers/researchers they can’t get the answers you need out of someone who doesn’t know them.  It would be like trying to squeeze blood from a stone. So spend your time (and your clients money) more wisely and put a little more effort into your selecting participants for your next cardsort or usability test.

Acknowledgements:
I want to thank Chris Farnum and Margaret Hanley for their help and encouragement.  Any errors in this post are, of course, my own.

Jared Spool & 1Billion$

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

Jared Spool of UIE gave a nice talk at redUXdc last weekend. One thing that struck me was the the 1Billion$ idea. He talked about Amazon. And if they get people/customers to spend an extra 5$ a transaction that represents $875,000,000 top line growth. Very close to 1Billion$. That is my kind of math.

I’ll add a link to Jared’s presentation if I can find it online.

“Information Just Wants to be Free” – It’s not about the $

Monday, May 11th, 2009

Information Just Wants to be Free

Wikipedia has a good history of ways different people have used that expression, though not the way I am seeing it.

Maya Design & Viz did some excellent thinking around information and published a number of whitepapers around the turn of the century that still influence how I think about information. A key enabling concept is universal uniqueness of information.

“This uniqueness allows the development of tools that are information-centric, not document-centric — where information is trapped in or tightly bound by the software that created it. Freeing information allows software to be crafted that uses data in exactly the ways humans want.” – Viz

Wow – It’s not about the money. It is about free from a particular DB or software structure. It is about being free from the old structure, legacy systems, walled gardens, and being locked down. Free to be used beyond the DB structure.  This is way beyond the MVC architectural pattern and into Maya’s very cool concept of U-Form.  This is really cool stuff and has helped me the most in area of corporate dashboards and business intelligence applications that pull information from both internal operations and from “scanning” or “sensing” external data sources.


Interview and article on integrating information architecture procedures

Thursday, May 7th, 2009

Harold Maduro, who works at BootStudio, interviewed a number of information architects and user experience people (myself included) on advice for members of the web design community to help them integrate information architecture procedures into their daily work and wrote up a great pithy article on his blog.

Article (spanish)
Interview (part 1)

Moneyball for Fielding User Experience Teams: Or Why a “1 Billion Dollar” Idea?

Monday, May 4th, 2009

Why a Billion Dollar Idea?

The origin for my fever for billion dollar ideas. It has two factors.

Factor 1: Impact to the Street

First I think 1 billion in top-line growth is a nice big goal that could be seen in Fortune 100 dividends or yearly statements. That is the kind of visible and measurable effect I want UX to have in a company and on an industry.

Factor 2: UX team impact

Secondly I have a plan for a very specific UX team. It has a certain size, roles, skills and experience. With that particular team I know we could generate ideas that would result in 1 Billion a year in top-line growth. You can think of it as moneyball for user experience. Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game” by Michael M. Lewis was about the Oakland Athletics baseball team and Billy Beane, who used a analytical approach to assembling a competitive baseball team.

How a US Pharma can realize 1 Billion dollars in top-line growth

Monday, May 4th, 2009

I was having drinks and talking with Henrike Boysen from MISI and we were talking about pharmaceutical companies since so much work in the Philly area is for them. We were talking about value and we stumbled across this great idea.

Current Situation:
Doctors write scripts which get sent to pharmacy to be filled out and the patient shows up to pick them up. Some Doctors now write electronic script which get sent to the pharmacy and is filled out and ready to be picked up by the time the patient gets there. About 1/3 of scripts written by patients never end up being filled/picked/used by the patients. 3 Billion scripts written a year in US. $300B value a year. $10 a script average.

Possible Future Situation: When the Doctor is filling out the electronic script (and she is in front of the patient), she asks the patient for an email address. 2-3 days after there is a reminder email sent out automatically to patient.

Market Size: . 33% of 3B scripts is 1B scripts not used. If we use a 1 percent conversion of email marketing to those 1B unfilled scripts (respectable amount) that gives us 100,000,000 scripts we could hope would be filled after someone gets an email reminder. 100,000,000 multipled by the $10 value of each script gives us 1 Billion Dollars.

Other possible Issues/Ideas:

  • Not all Doctors use PDA to fill out and make electronic scripts. But with this kind of $, Big Pharma could subsidize.
  • After the 3 day period and no pick up at pharmacy, the email could include a additional percentage off like 10% to incentivize.
  • The email could include additional information about the benefits of the drug to incentivize.
  • The email could have a link so the patient could do “mail” fulfillment.

References:
Why patients don’t take their medicine (Nonadherence section and the patient intentional Predictors of treatment concordance problem)

Voicemail Reminder System

Market Size of prescriptions in US