The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
The story boards were created to visually communicate how our product would be used in the context of hiking. They augmented our user journey map by narrowing the focus on one fragment of the user journey and assisted our team with the lo- fi prototypes by visualizing how users can interact with the digital map and what features should be included in the prototype. We individually designed each of the storyboards with a user pain point and a pathway to address the needs of the user. These were mainly focused on getting the scenario and general approach correctly and had not delved too deep into the specific solution features. These solution ideas in our storyboard developed into more specifically constructed features in our low-fidelity prototype.
Reflection
Our Biggest Challenge 🚧
When we conducted our user interviews, a diverse range of issues was brought up. For example, one user mentioned that environmental damage and pollution was a significant deterrent to their hiking experience while another user mentioned that scheduling and coordinating was a vocal point of frustration. Our team attempted to tackle all of these problems in one application which proved to be challenging. We found that addressing all of these issues made it difficult to focus on a cohesive goal that we wanted our product to accomplish and resulted in some features that did not align with the core experience we were trying to create for our target user group. Many of these issues arose from the COVID-19 pandemic and the lack of a diverse group of people to perform user testing and interviews on. In the future, it would be wise to conduct more user research and usability tests to solidify our design requirements and to make sure that we stay aligned with what our target users need.
What We Learned 💡
This project contributed to our learning and education. One of the most significant things we learned was the idea of continually placing ourselves in the user's shoes throughout the design process. There were many times where we came up with an idea but had to take a step back and consider how this idea/feature would work on the user’s side. We also learned a lot about the importance of iteration and building off of critique. There is a significant difference between our early initial wireframes to the high fidelity prototype we developed in the end stage of our product. Getting multiple perspectives and feedback from peers and professors pointed out many flaws and inconsistencies we had not seen ourselves, such as layout, design, and intuitiveness.
What Would We do Differently? 🤔
There are also a couple of things we would do differently after having completed this project. One thing that stands out is to ask more follow up questions during the initial user interviews. We found that as we continued designing our prototype we came up with many questions we would have liked to ask potential users (we received feedback and answers to our questions during peer review, but advancing the initial user interviews is something we will keep in mind in the future). Furthermore, another thing we would like to do differently is to focus on not getting too attached to one idea or solution. We considered and discussed many different solution ideas, including apps, physical products, and a gamification approach. Getting too deeply attached to one feature complicated the process of narrowing down on a particular solution.