Develop
Focusing on the chosen problem, with the distilled needs and challenges/constraints in mind, we brainstormed ideas. As we ideated, we realised that not all ideas have to satisfy all needs or overcome all the challenges/constraints.
Day 3 - BrainstormingAt the end of the brainstorming exercise, we merged some of the ideas to create complete solutions.
Key Takeaway:
Individual ideas in the brainstorming phase are not meant to be perfect, they may resolve only part of the problem but that's still valuable.
We suggested three such solutions to the POC before creating prototypes, so that we could revise our ideas as quickly as possible.
Verifying the Insights Collected and Suggesting IdeasIn suggesting the solutions, we recognised the importance that the recipient understood the solution well, so we tried our best to explain any technical or niche terms. Without proper explanation, we feared that the recipient may reject a good idea because the concept of it is too foreign.
Key Takeaway:
Understand your stakeholders and ensure that ideas shared can be understood, so that feedback received is relevant.
The POC responded in favour of the following idea:
Print plaques describing the story behind each item/art piece, place it near the item/art piece. On the plaques, include a weblink to https://www.annexecommunities.org.uk/ as well as a QR code for the same weblink.
By having the information stored on the Annexe's website, it is better managed and less likely to disappear for unknown reasons (as previously experienced).
Additionally, make the location part of a publicly available "treasure hunt" game, such as geocaching. This will encourage a younger crowd to visit the location, and at the same time, learn about the Annexe Communities' work.
Even with low-fidelity prototyping, we realised it was a crucial tool in the development of ideas as we were able to better visualise how the solution would be implemented.
Day 4 - Prototyping (Storyboard)For instance, we identified a few logistic challenges in implementing the solution through our first storyboard, which was made from the perspective of one of the key stakeholders.
Additionally, we identified the need for us to revise our list of stakeholders, as Geocaching became the core of our solution, after the POC showed her enthusiasm for that aspect in our solution.
Key Takeaway:
Prototyping was a valuable tool for us to identify potential flaws in the solution, as it enabled us to visualise the implementation and imagine the experience from each stakeholder's perspective.
Some of what we learned up to this point in our design journey are covered in a video presentation, available here.
After learning what we did through the first prototype, we saw the need to revise our list of constraints as it was limiting the creativity of our ideas to try to satisfy everyone (people of all ages, with and without phones).
Key Takeaway:
Constraints may need to be refined to create a feasible solution. You can't please everyone all the time.
With the revised constraints, we had to revisit the brainstorm process again. This time, we had more creative freedom in our solution due to the reduced constraints.
For this brainstorm session, we decided to take a more focused approach, ideating only for a specific part in the user journey, with an emphasis on some of the key stakeholders.
Key Takeaways:
1. The design process is not linear - you may need to repeat some stages to refine your idea. (eg. Brainstorm, prototype, then back to brainstorm).
2. Brainstorming can be performed on a specific part of the problem, to focus efforts on working on the details that are crucial to implementation.
Integrative thinking was then applied to decide which idea to adopt, after generating a few possible ones to achieve each sub-goal identified.
Integrative Thinking ExerciseWhat was interesting about this exercise was the comparison of benefits. Before this, during the brainstorming session, we were most frequently eliminating ideas based on their cons, rather than selecting which to keep based on their pros.
Key Takeaway:
Combining the pros of the ideas in contention helped us to see how sometimes, maximising benefit may lead to a more effective solution than by minimising the disadvantages or limitations.
As we created our first paper prototype of the suggested solution, we began to think more about the finer details and feasibility of implementing the solution in the real environment, instead of just the logistics. For instance, there was the maintenance to consider and durability of certain elements of our solution (e.g. having a button-operated speaker in public, how do we design it to be weather-proof and withstand misuse?), as well as what items we should have in the Geocache container.
In deciding on what to place in the geocache container, our intention was to select an item that had a meaningful story behind it with relation to the theme of a community, to hopefully compel readers to participate in the Annexe Communities' activities. These intentions were inspired through empathising with the Annexe Communities, as we revisited the POC's responses during the first interview (Day 2 - Interview, Identifying Problems, Constraints, Motivations and Stakeholders). We extracted that the POC highly valued fostering a sense of connection between members of the community. By encouraging geocachers who find the geocache container to take an item with a meaningful story attached, it is hoped that it will move them to contributing a story of their own and even deciding to participate in the Annexe Communities' activities.
We decided on origami cranes, attaching the story of Sadako, which illustrates how every little effort counts towards achieving a larger goal.
Paper PrototypeAfter presenting our paper prototype to the POC, we learnt that the feasibility of implementation was important to them too, in fact it was the main concern highlighted in their feedback. We understood the significance of this, and internally, we established that success in our eyes would be to find a way to make it feasible to turn our solution into reality.
Key Takeaway:
An implemented or feasible solution was favoured over a perfect idea, in the eyes of the client.
We were pleased to hear that the POC thoroughly appreciated our idea of placing origami cranes in the geocache container. It reflected to us that we understood well the motivations of our stakeholders.
We also inquired on the power and interest of each stakeholder with regards to stakeholder analysis and mapping, after revising the list of stakeholders and the stakeholder map a few times (all versions available here). We needed to ensure that we were accurately prioritising the stakeholders to reflect how they influence our designing of the solution. From the POC's response, we gathered that we were on the right track, and accurately distinguished stakeholders who we should consider in terms of both the implementation and outcome of our solution, from those who we should not consider in the implementation.
The positive reception to our proposed ideas suggested that our efforts in analysing each stakeholder through stakeholder mapping and empathy maps enabled us to understand the problem quite well.
Day 7 - Client Meeting FeedbackOn the point of considering the feasibility of our solution, if we could redo the development phase of our project, we wonder if we would factor feasibility in, so early on. On one hand, it could help us speed up the prototyping phase, as we could eliminate ideas whose feasibility was not straightforward. On the other hand, our solution's innovation may be reduced if we stuck with ideas that would be easy to implement.
Key Takeaway:
How early to factor in the feasibility of solution may be dependent on the type of solution we want to design. In our case, we saw that the Annexe Communities had already employed the mainstream methods to resolve their problems, such as the use of social media, a website and physical posters. However, the problems they faced still persisted, which suggested to us that our solution might need to be more innovative.
Therefore, if we could redo the development phase of our project, we would still not prioritise the feasibility of ideas during brainstorming, as it would have limited our innovation.