top of page
Designing for managing incontinence
Design research - Understanding goals, challenges and motivations for women having incontinence and designing a solution for them to manage incontinence
[NDA]: Due to non-disclosure agreement signed with the project stakeholders, only limited work is shared.
Tools used: Figma, Figjam, Usertesting.com
Group size: 3
TASK
-
Stakeholders interview/focus group sessions
-
Generative research to understand goals, challenges and motivations
-
Personas and Customer Journey Map creation
-
Extracting design recommendations
-
Competitor analysis
-
Heuristic analysis
-
Low Fidelity Concepts creation
-
Concept Validation, Card Sorting and Usability Testing
-
High Fidelity Concepts creation
STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEW
Stakeholders interviews were conducted in the form of focus group sessions. Figjam was used to capture the comments.
Altogether about 12 questions were asked. Some of the questions are:
- Who are our users: assumptions and traits we know for sure?
- What are short term and long term business goals?
- How would you define success for the product and project?
The comments from stakeholders were captured in three categories:
-What we know
-What we want to know
-Specific worries
GENERATIVE RESEARCH
The goal of generative research was to understand users' goals, motivations and challenges in managing incontinence. The research was qualitative in nature.
A research protocol/experiment design was framed for the research study.
Based on the research protocol, a questionnaire was designed which was aimed at asking questions to the users. Questions were grouped into categories: Introductory, goals and challenges, feature usefulness and product design. Altogether 30 questions were framed.
Post creation of questionnaire, users were recruited based on the screening criteria decided in the stakeholder interviews.
Usertesting.com was utilised for the user interviews.
Altogether, 8 participants were recruited from Australia and New Zealand and it was a 90 minutes session/user.
The data from the user interviews were transcribed and an affinity diagram was made to analyse the data.
PERSONAS & CJM
With the analysed data, 3 personas and 3 customer journey maps were created.
The personas were:
-
Women who have just delivered a baby and have incontinence since then
-
Women who have delivered 3-4 years back and have incontinence since then
-
Women who have reached menopause and have incontinence since then
Other than personas and customer journey maps, there were some design recommendations as well like:
-
What feature the users would like to have
-
What would they like/dislike about community
-
Visual Design: Graphics and Colors
-
How the avatar functionality should be
COMPETITOR ANALYSIS
In the stakeholders interview, it was decided to make the product a Progressive Web Application (PWA) i.e. the product would be hosted on and triggered from a website.
For this reason, a competitor analysis was done for Poise.au website. It was compared with 3 other direct competitors.
The comparision was made on the following criteria:
-
Features offered
-
Information architecture
-
Workflow
-
Visual Design and Content
Based on the analysis, changes in the website were suggested and prioritised.
HEURISTIC ANALYSIS
In parallel with Competitor analysis, Heuristic analysis was also done.
The Heuristic principles by Nielsen Norman group was followed for doing the analysis.
The analysis was done for each page wherein what is present and what is absent/what could be improved was mentioned.
Lo-Fi CONCEPTS
With the data obtained from Generative Research, Personas and Customer Journey Map, Heuristic and Competitor analysis, low fidelity (Lo-Fi) concepts were created.
CARD SORTING
There were some functionalities that we were doubtful about as to where to position them in terms of categorisation.
Altogether, 19 cards were identified for which participants have to categorise: sort the cards into similar groups and name them.
Open card sorting exercise was performed with 15 participants.
Usertesting.com was utilised for the card sorting exercise.
With the result of open card sorting exercise, Information Architecture (IA) was designed.
CONCEPT VALIDATION
With the Lo-Fi concepts and the Information Architecture created, the concepts were validated.
Some of the questions covered were:
-
As per your opinion, what is the main message communicated through this page? [Verbal response]
-
How much do you like the content of this page? [5-point Rating scale: I do not like the content at all to I like the content very much]
-
Which part of this page is most compelling to you? [Written response]
-
Which part of this page is least compelling to you? [Written response]
-
How well do you understand the content/purpose of this page? [5-point Rating scale: I could not understand at all to I was able to understand the content fully]
-
If there is anything you could not understand, please mention about it. [Verbal response]
-
What would you like to see more (if any) on this page that would be helpful to you? [Verbal response]
9 participants were recruited for this exercise and Usertesting.com was utilised.
USABILITY TESTING
The Lo-Fi concepts were further validated based on navigation, visual design and usability. For Usability, System Usability Scale (SUS) was used.
Some of the questions covered for navigation and visual design were:
-
What part of the application made it easy to accomplish the activity? Please explain your answer. [Verbal response]
-
What part of the application made it difficult/frustrating to accomplish the activity? Please explain your answer. [Verbal response]
-
I find the different pages in the application to be attractive. Please explain your answer [5-point Rating scale: Not at all attractive to Very attractive]
-
The content of the different pages in the application has a clean and simple presentation. Please explain your answer. [5-point Rating scale: Not at all simple and clean presentation to Very simple and clean presentation]
-
Based on your exploration of the application, how do you find the navigation design (ease of navigating to different functionalities). Please explain your answer. [5-point Rating scale: Very difficult navigation to Very easy navigation]
-
How do you find the overall design of the application? Please explain your answer. [5-point Rating scale: Not at all engaging design to Very engaging design]
9 participants were recruited for this exercise and Usertesting.com was utilised.
Hi-Fi CONCEPTS
With the data obtained from Card sorting, Concept Validation and Usability Testing, High fidelity (Hi-Fi) concepts were created.
bottom of page