Conducting a usability study for a Llama web app prototype that aimed to assess the usability and ease of use, as well as to see if the app was intuitive for regular functions. Through conducting user interviews, task-based evaluations, and user feedback, the study aimed to find any issues so that I could know what user roadblocks would need to be found and fixed before creating a full fledged surface comp.
The llama rental web app was created to help a fictitious company that rents its llamas out for different purposes to create a more efficient method of allowing users to rent llamas for certain purposes and times; however, the prototype has not been successfully tested to see if users would even be able to effectively use the app if it was an option in the first place. Because of this, a usability study is needed to test the app and find any potential problems now before it becomes too time consuming to change.
To conduct a usability study that uses qualitative research methods, such as user interviews and task based evaluations, to get insight into the user’s experience, interactions, and preferences. The results will help with creating design improvements, creating an overall more effective product.
As the sole researcher and developer, Idesigned, implemented, and conducted the Usability Study for the Llama App prototype, which included everything from the research design, to data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
When starting a usability study, it's a good idea to first start with a research plan so you can focus your research and get results that'll meaningfully impact your work. That's why I started by going over what objectives I had, the scope I would conduct the research, and deciding on the best methodology for finding any possible user roadblocks in this specific case. I also reviewed what features the prototype had so that I would be sure that the tasks I assigned would actually be completable. While preparing the research plan, I decided that an in person interview method where users would be able to be hands on with the prototype would be the best method.
With the research plan in mind, I then began to look at preparing questions that would cover the whole range of the prototype while also allowing users to freely share their thoughts, issues, and suggestions they had for the app.
I knew that having the right kind of people, who belonged to the target audiences the app was for, would provide the best responses to validate any findings I would make. Because I knew a couple of people who belonged to the target audiences -farmers and serious hikers-, I reached out directly to them to see if they would be willing to be interviewed. Since I knew them, I offered to feed them in exchange for their time.
My methodology of conducting the interviews was to have the user use my phone, which had the Figma prototype open, and ask them the research questions. When I asked them to complete a task, I would take note of the path interviewees chose to use to get there, any perceived problems I saw that they had, and any comments they had along the way. I made sure to not help them at all, only marking down if they were not able to complete the tasks if they couldn't figure it out themselves, and resetting the screen to the home screen every time to get the same base for every interviewee. Once I had everyone's responses, I combined it all together and began to think about what changes were needed.
The biggest findings I found came down to content missing that was expected to be there, such as about pages or information about the llamas. Other issues stemmed from issues in how pages were connected together, which led to confusion. In order to fix these two main issues, as well as some other minor ones, I looked at how I could rearrange and change the prototype. I first fixed the hamburger menu so that there was a sign in/log in button. I also changed the prototype so that only options that should appear on the screen, such as a profile link, would only appear when a user should be able to see it, and not when they are not “logged in”. With a couple of other features added and some small adjustments, the changes fed from implementing feedback led to a better user experience for the target audience.
While the study accomplished what I wanted it to do, I wish I was able to gather more information by having both more interviewees as well as different versions of the prototype. Having more people to interview would help confirm potential problems a user base is likely to have, vs just one person. More versions of a prototype would also help test different solutions, which can help find the best solution quicker. The biggest improvement that I could make, in my mind, would have been to conduct another study after having made changes. Sure, some changes I made were no doubt improvements to the prototype, but others may not have been what I think they were. Conducting quick study would have helped me know that the changes made were actually helpful or even in reality harmful to the overall design.
The Usability Study provided me with invaluable insights into user interactions, preferences, and usability issues. These insights helped to optimize the applications effectiveness and improve the overall user experience. Without these insights, issues, such as the inability to rent a trailer to carry the llamas, would have made the overall rental process more difficult for the user. The redesign fed by the results helped to ensure a final product that meets stakeholder needs and user expectations.