1. Johann Schrammel Manfred Tscheligi CURE Center for Usability Research & Engineering Scouting Workshop Usability in Multimedia Environment Bratislava, September 3 rd, 2003 Usability Engineering as Integrative Part of Innovative E-Solutions

2. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 2 First of all For the User the User Interface IS the system The technical background is of no interest for her/him, that must „just work“ error-free !

3. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 3 What is Usability Definition (ISO): Usability is the "effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which a specified set of users can achieve a specified set of tasks in a particular environment." Usability is objectively measurable. has concrete positive effects (e.g. financial, saftey-related). can be achieved by use of structured and well defined processes.

4. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 4 Usability Criteria Classical Criteria: Learnability. How quickly can a user learn to use a new system in order to perform tasks? Rememberability. How quickly can a user remember the way to use a rarely used system? Efficiency in use. What effort in terms of resources is necessary for experienced users to perform tasks? Reliability in use. How does a system react to errors provoked by the user and what consequences do user errors have? User Satisfaction. How satisfactorily can the system be used? Additional Criteria (User Experience): Attractivity Enjoyability Trust

5. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 5 UI-Principles Consistency Feedback Efficiency Flexibility Clearly marked Exits Wording in users‘ language Task orientation Control Recovery and Forgiveness Minimize Memory Load Transparency Esthetics and Emotional Effect Basic user interface (UI) principles must be thoroughly considered in the design of all (interactive) systems and user interfaces. They can be regarded as basic quality criteria:

6. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 6 Why it is important Bad usabilty Costs time and money Is a safety risk Is a competitive disadvantage Lowers costumer/employee satisfaction

7. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 7 Example: Efficiency Work efficiency 250 user, 60 cases/day, 230 days/year Improoved usability: processing time/case 10 seconds reduced 250 User * 60 cases * 230 days* 10 sec = 958.3 hours saved The rule of thumb: „Every dollar invested in ease of use returns $10 to $100." Cost Justifying Ease of Use, IBM Report.

8. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 8 Example: Safety Title selection CD selection Title selection

9. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 9 Why is Usability so difficult to achieve: Bad systems aren‘t designed on purpose! Some Reasons: One cannot go back to know nothing Users interpret things different than experts/designers Users behave in unexpected ways Help doesn‘t Details matter Users don‘t „know“ what they „need“ Nobody can get it right the first time Patchwork-Design...

10. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 10 Usability Engineering Process to achieve usable systems Methodical and planed procedure Design Prototyping Evaluation Analysis Implemen- tation Implemen- tation Potentialization

11. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 11 User centred design process ISO 13407 2. Specify the context of use 3. Specify user and organisational requirements 4. Produce design solutions 1. Plan the human centred process 5. Evaluate design against user requirements Meets requirements

12. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 12 Process 2. Specify the context of use 3. Specify user and organisational requirements 1. Plan the human centred process ISO 13407 User centred design process - plus CURE additions, derived from practice Conceptual, structural design Detailed design 4. Produce design solutions 5. Evaluate design against user requirements Evaluate with users Meets requirements

13. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 13 Methodical principles Plan and structure the process Usability doesn‘t happen on it‘s one. Definition of goals Define a breakpoint, don‘t rely on somebody to say it‘s good enough or wait until there‘s no more time available. User involvement You‘ll be surprised what users actually do. „External“view Get your blind spots uncovered. Iterative process Don´t be afraid of changing things. Early Feedback Don‘t waste your ressources on dead ends.

14. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 14 Activities POTENTIALIZATION ANALYSIS & SPECIFICATION DESIGN PROTOTYPING IMPLEMENTATION Identification and development of product ideas from a user perspective Gathering of user requirements, definition of context of use, analysis of related systems Realisation of User Interfaces Use of design methods Development of User Interface Prototypes Adequate Implementation Quality assurance throughout the whole process EVALUATION

15. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 15 POTENTIALIZATION Identification and development of product ideas from a user perspective Identification of market opportunities from a user perspective not only technology driven Generation/Evaluation of Ideas Typical Methods: User inquiries Focus groups Market analyses Example: What do kids (8-12) want to do with communication devices?

16. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 16 ANALYSIS & SPECIFICATION Analysis of all aspects of the system: User (target groups) Tasks Context of use Requirements Predecessor Competing systems Benefits Technical possibilities Innovative potential Typical Methods: Workshops Focus groups Observations Inquiries

17. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 17 DESIGN Structured process: Information architecture Conceptual Design Detailed Design Design of methaphors, icons,.. Graphics Design Use existing methods (parallel design, participatory design,...) Include existing knowledge: Studies, experience,... Accurate team Integrate users and costumers Ongoing quality assurance Iterative Process

18. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 18 PROTOTYPING User Interface Prototypes Prototyps of system in different development stages Paper or electronic prototypes Horizontal/vertical Enables early feedback Example: Remote control and On-screen display for tv-set by use of digitiser tablet

19. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 19 IMPLEMENTATION Take care of usability aspects of technology User groups Context of use Technical equipment Use of proper tools Plan for changes Documentation

20. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 20 EVALUATION Principles: On time Ongoing Valid methods Different kinds: User and expert-based Standardised and tailored Labor and field The more innovative, the more testing required

21. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 21 EVALUATION Identification of Problems Causes Improovement possibilities (within given conditions) Typical Methods: Tests Walkthroughs (Expert Reviews) Conformity Assessment Coaching, Shadowing...

22. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 22 Example I: European Patent Office Relaunch of the EPO-Website Basic information: Several hundrets of content pages Integration of online services: Patent-database Online application for patents Recherche in official communications Access to legal documents (e.g. European Patent Convention) Three languages

23. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 23 Activities Usability workshop Analysis of user, tasks, context Initial usability review of 12 pages prototype Review of cut through prototype Guidelines and feedback for navigation structure Testing of navigation structure Usability test Final Review Documentation and Style Guide

24. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 24 Usability Workshop Goals: Development of common understanding of project Stimulate communication Sensitize for usability issues Build knowledge user-oriented design approaches tools and technics Identify chances, challenges & pitfalls Two day-workshop Participants from all involved areas: decision makers, designers, technicians, marketing, usability engineers, helpdesk,...

25. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 25 Analysis Methods: E-mail questionnaire Focus groups Analysis of server logs (of existing site) Analysis of helpdesk-requests Results: User group defintion and characterisation Task description and priorisation Definition of technical requirements

26. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 26 Initial Review 12 pages prototype (screenshots) Focus: Gereral concept Navigation mechanism Conceptual Design To be able to provide early feedback To focus ressources were they are most needed.

27. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 27 Navigation Structure General guideline document for designing navigation structure Quality Aspects Naming of items Length of items Breath and deeph of structure Methodical/process guidelines Whom to involve How to do it Iterative expert feedback on drafts

28. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 28 Review of cut through prototype 30-pages prototype Complete paths down (5 levels) Content pages Subportals and microsites Focus: Content pages Cross linking Detailed design Integration of subportals/microsites

29. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 29 Testing of Navigation Structure Simple html-prototype without graphics Whole structure Test persons of three main user groups 25-30 search tasks Automatic logging of search paths Qualitative interviews

30. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 30 Usability Test 60 pages functional prototype Covered all main areas 3x10 test persons: patent attorneys, patent applicants, generally interested persons 3 realistic task sets (8-10 tasks) Focus: Identification of remaining problems Empirical answers to open design questions

31. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 31 Final Review Final usability check of masterpages Monitoring of changes Check of Integration Big Picture Methodical Note: Done by usability engineers not involved in the project until then

32. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 32 Documentation and Style Guide Provides the knowledge needed to guarantee consistent and durable appearance and behaviour Keep evolving website consitent to initially intended design and behaviour. Contents: General considerations Description and determination of rules for the website structure and their elements specific interaction techniques used the visual design and layout of page elements Documentation of design & usability engineering process

33. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 33 Example II: Consensus Development of adaption engine that will enable programmers to develop browser based applications for a variety of different mobile devices by the usage of only one tool. The need to adapt applications manually to the different devices shall be minimised. Usability research and empirical studies focusing on the requirements of different mobile devices make sure that the usability of the resulting applications meets high quality standards. www.consensus-online.org EU-funded (IST-program)

34. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 34 Dilemma - Cost vs. Usability Integrated adaptation Cost Usability Recoding semantic adaptation device & application specific Transcoding syntactic adaptation technology specific CONSENSUS provides: semantic information context information to make integrated adaption possible because only transcoding or only recording is not sufficient

35. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 35 Concept Development of a mark-up language supporting the automatic adaptation of UIs for mobile devices (not part of this presentation) Device classes (3 dimensions) Presentation structure Supported input modality Mark-up language Development of user interface guidelines for 8 device classes (Application Programming Guidelines) Empirical studies informing the Application Programming Guidelines

36. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 36 Activities Potentialization: Which applications are of use in mobile situations Expert interviews, focus groups, online questionaire, analysis of existing solutions Analysis: User/Task/context analysis of mobile business applications Identification of user groups Identification of use patterns Identification of use contexts/constraints Clustering of devices Guidelines: Literature, empirical studies & expert knowledge Maximum level of application complexity per device class E.g. maximum number of digits to be entered Design principles Decision on optimal interaction techniques per device class Interaction modules per device class

37. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 37 Device classes Usability Input leads to a limited number of Device Classes which represent devices behaving similar from a users / usability perspective Different devices require different interfaces Infinite number of tests vs. clustering 3 dimensions determining usability Presentation structure (Output) Input modality Mark-Up Language (Widget set) Input Bandwidth Output Bandwidth Navigation Bandwidth

38. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 38 Device classes Class 1: Screen size: 64x96pixel, input: T9, WAP1 Class 2: Screen size: 176x220pixel, input: T9, WAP2 Class 3: Screen size: 160x160/240x320pixel, input: pen, HTML Class 4: Screen size: 640x320pixel, input: QUERTY, HTML Class 0: standard phone

39. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 39 User Interface Guidelines - Approach Research Question Usability Report (D1) Guidelines (D2) Empirical Study (planned) Literature Literature Research Internal Experience Priority High? No Empirical Study Yes Guidelines (D2)

40. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 40 Example study I Scrolling vs. pagination (set up) Possible disadvantages of scrolling: Handling of scroll bars Loss of orientation within the text 4 devices Standardised text complexity and lengths Measurements of Comfort (Ratings 1 – 5) Reading time Text comprehension Qualitative interviews

41. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 41 Example study I Scrolling vs. pagination (results) Reading speedComfort ratings Scrolling is superior Reasons: Loading times Reader looses context

42. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 42 Example study II Length of alphabetical lists (set up) Maximum level of complexity How many entries can a user handle Threshold of pain 5 devices List lengths defined according to the devices’ vertical screen size Measurement of Task completion times Pain levels (Threshold lines) Comfort (Ratings 1 – 5) Qualitative interviews

43. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 43 Example study II Length of alphabetical lists (results) Class 2 ratings due to hardware problems, not defined by the device classification No limit, as long as the software and hardware interface is (almost) optimal Results of unsorted lists are different Standardised “threshold lines”

44. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 44 Application programming guidelines Results of empirical studies and from other sources Maximum complexity levels per device class Definition of interaction techniques per device class Design solutions Interaction modules Design principles (soft guidelines) Target group (application programmers) Electronic and task oriented version Tree structured guidelines based on user tasks Ongoing development (comments field) Input to RIML and architecture specification

45. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 45 Prototype Example Screenshot “Search Results” These screenshots show the different outputsv of an search-results page and illustrate that lists are paginated differently depending on the target device’s input mechanism and on its screen size.

46. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 46 CURE Usability Engineering Labs Ca 140 m 2 Labs 2 Control Rooms 2 Monitoring Rooms Office Lab Leisure Lab Group Room 2 Mobile Labs

47. Usability Engineering – Bratislava - September 2003 Delivering THE User Experience – Page 47 Thank You! CURE Center for Usability Research & Engineering Hauffgasse 3-5 A-1110 Vienna, Austria www.cure.at Johann Schrammel Manfred Tscheligi Phone +43 1 743 54 51 {schrammel, tscheligi}@cure.at