...
| Task 1: Read Messages | Task 2: Create New Message | Task 3: Reply to a Message |
|---|
Critical Incidents | - Not sure which messages are unread
- one user thought selected email was unread because of shading, other started clicking through every message
- Message automatically opened on sign-in confused some users
| - Expected functionality from template (default fill in for subject, message, hash tags)
- "Note vs Issue" made users confused
- "Template" dropdown, checkboxes were overlooked
- Trash can (delete) button confused users
| - Users were confused by "title" of reply
- one user wished it had been filled in
|
Usability Issues | Unread messages lack proper affordances.
Multiple users had trouble identifying which messages were unread. Currently, unread messages were simply bolded (similar to Gmail), but some users missed this or thought the selected (shaded) message meant that message was unread (the shaded message reflects the message this is currently open). | Visibility of advanced features lacking.
Users overlooked some of the advanced features including the template, "alert desk captain", "high priority", and "note vs issue"
Affordances of Functionality: Users expected the template to accomplish much more than it did. Users did not understand the purpose of the hash tag
| Perceived User Model of "Reply" varies.
Some users saw reply as a Facebook comment, and were confused by the extra features (title, hash tags). Others saw it as an email reply and expected the title to be filled in
|
...
Several users compared CollabDesk to Gmail, an unintended but logical connection (some of the UI is modeled after Gmail) but this metaphor is not entirely appropriate since there are inconsistencies between this and an email system (messages are not "sent", they are posted, more like a Facebook wall).
Unread messages lack proper affordances. Multiple users had trouble identifying which messages were unread. Currently, unread messages were simply bolded (similar to Gmail), but some users missed this or thought the selected (shaded) message meant that message was unread (the shaded message reflects the message this is currently open).
Tasks should be added/edited to focus on advanced features (hash tags for search filtering). This may be easier in the computer prototype.
Round 1 Prototype Iteration
Browse messages (Left pane) | Read message (Top right pane)
| Create new message (Bottom right pane)
| Reply to message (Bottom right pane)
|
|---|
- Added “High priority” and/or “Alert desk captain” icons to quick view of messages.
| - Added “Edit” and “Delete” buttons. The “Delete” button does not permanently remove messages.
- Previously, we always showed “High priority” and “Alert desk captain” icons on each message, and highlighted them if they applied to the message. Changed it so they only appear when they have been selected.
| - Changed trashcan icon to a “Clear” button to make it more clear that clicking this clears all the fields in this panel.
- Removed “Close” icon, which had been an “X”.
- Changed “Minimize” icon from “-“ to double down carets.
- Changed panel heading from “New message from <Desk worker name>” to “Create New Message”.
- Created titles, tags, and skeleton messages for each template in the “Templates” drop-down menu.
- Increased font size of “Alert desk captain”, “High priority”, and “Note vs. Issues” choices.
- Added an example tag: #example, instead of showing just “#”.
- Changed “Title” to “Subject” to more closely follow Gmail analogy.
| - Filled in “Subject” line with “Re: Original Message Subject” as in Gmail. This field is editable.
|
Unread messages lack proper affordances. Multiple users had trouble identifying which messages were unread. Currently, unread messages were simply bolded (similar to Gmail), but some users missed this or thought the selected (shaded) message meant that message was unread (the shaded message reflects the message this is currently open).
Round 2 Observations
| Task 1: Read Messages | Task 2: Create New Message | Task 3: Reply to a Message |
|---|
Critical Incidents | - Not sure which messages are unread
- one user thought selected email was unread because of shading, other started clicking through every message
- Message automatically opened on sign-in confused some users
| - Expected functionality from template (default fill in for subject, message, hash tags)
- "Note vs Issue" made users confused
- "Template" dropdown, checkboxes were overlooked
- Trash can (delete) button confused users
| - Users were confused by "title" of reply
- one user wished it had been filled in
| - Unsure where to find the unread messages at first
- Took 30 seconds of scanning the whole interface before found
- Thought there was only one unread message but there were two
- Assumed shading meant unread (though it indicates the currently selected message shown in the reading pane) and didn't seem to notice the bolding
| - Didn't see the "Alert Desk Captain" option immediately, but found after a little bit more searching
- Some confusion about exactly where and to whom messages were sent
- After selecting the "Missing Package" template, didn't fill in any of the fields in the message body (description / recipient)
| - Took a while to find the "Reply" button
- Thought about using Create New Message to reply instead
|
Usability Issues | Unread messages lack proper affordances.
Multiple Similar to Round 1, multiple users had trouble finding the unread messages and/or identifying which messages were unread. Currently, unread messages were simply bolded (similar to Gmail), but some users missed this or thought the selected (shaded) message meant that message was unread (the shaded message reflects the message this is currently open). We thought this was a paper prototype issue before so we didn't change it, but now we know it is a serious issue to address, | Visibility of advanced features lacking.
Users No one overlooked some of the advanced features including the template, "alert desk captain", "high priority", and "note vs issue"
Affordances of Functionality: Users expected the template to accomplish much than it did. Users did not understand the purpose of the hash tag
| Perceived User Model of "Reply" varies.
Some users saw reply as a Facebook comment, and were confused by the extra features (title, hash tags). Others saw it as an email reply and expected the title to be filled in
|
Overall:
Several users compared CollabDesk to Gmail, an unintended but logical connection (some of the UI is modeled after Gmail) but this metaphor is not entirely appropriate since there are inconsistencies between this and an email system (messages are not "sent", they are posted, more like a Facebook wall).
this time, but it took too long to find for some users.
Message Recipients Unclear:
To whom the messages are sent is not indicated anywhere in the interface, which confused some, though most assumed (correctly) that it would be sent to everyone.
Template
Since selecting a category filled in a template in the message body, one user assumed they didn't need to add anything to it. Needs to draw user's attention to it so they add relevant information. | Visibility of Reply
The Reply button needs more visibility, though not standing out could be a downfall of paper prototyping since we sketched everything in pencil. |
Overall:
We conducted the second round of user tests on 3 desk workers. Several of them thought the advanced features (marking messages as a note/issue, high/low priority, etc) could be useful on the job. One worker indicated they would lTasks should be added/edited to focus on advanced features (hash tags for search filtering). This may be easier in the computer prototype.