top of page
Writer's picturedanielclarke1981

Week 1: The UX Tools and Design Processes

Updated: May 3, 2023

Week one of UXO720 - UX Design started with a brief introduction to the module and followed up with an overview of recommended tools and processes. As I watched the material, I couldn't help but feel this module is a natural progression from GDO710 - Development Practices, which is only slightly frustrating because I have completed the modules out of the recommended order. (GDO710 -> GDO730 -> UXO740 -> UXO720). I need to remember that this could not be helped, and circumstances outside of this MA required me to postpone. Plus I am happy with my progress so far in the course, with each module being challenging, but ultimately having this be the last taught module has not been detrimental to my achievements so far.


Tools

I was surprised that design tools such as Figma and Adobe XD weren't classed as prototyping tools as I've been using them this way during the other modules. This made me instantly stop and research the differences between "design" tools and the recommended "prototyping" tools recommended such as Protopie, Framer, and InVision. They looked like they allowed for much more sophisticated animations than you are able to achieve with Figma (which I have previously expressed my frustrations about during week 5 of GDO710's rapid ideation session ). This is great, as I am excited to explore micro-interactions and see if I can incorporate them into my prototype in a meaningful way.


SMART OBJECTIVE

Investigate one of the Prototyping tools recommended in this week's content during this module.


Design Process

It looks like we will be using the Lean UX model of build, measure, learn as a direct analogy for our learning process as well as the design process itself. I've been dancing around Lean UX for a while, reading about similar and competing frameworks such as the Lean Startup (Rise 2015) and Design Sprints (Knapp et al, 2017). With all, it's important to remember they are not linear processes and steps in the cycle can inform the previous step as much as the next one. It's about feeding your learnings (whether is about the techniques in this module or the user research) back into the process and never taking anything for granted or assuming you have the answers early on. Your assumptions could quite easily be challenged by additional information and this is all for the good of the end product.


The mention of pivoting in the course content this week really resonated with me. During GDO730 I created a user persona for my team to help anchor our project. The persona was based on secondary research which suggested that teenagers would be the target users, an assumption that would be challenged when we came to validate it with primary research. This was another important lesson to learn - I found it initially hard to move away from the first persona that I had carefully crafted from hours of research, but it would not sever my team or ultimately the end user if I stubbornly stuck with it in the face of contradictory evidence. This was a tough decision for not just me but the whole team as we were against the clock, but ultimately we decided to change very late on in the project to the more accurate persona.


The Double diamond was mentioned for the first time this week as was the framework from the Interaction Design Foundation and Stanford d.school (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Clarke 2023 . Design Foundation and Stanford d.school
Figure 1: Clarke 2023 . Design Foundation and Stanford d.school

I had previously mentioned in my personal case study for GDO710 my enthusiasm to examine further the Stanford d.school framework so I'm glad we got straight to it in Week 1! It also looks like we will be using it for our weekly Challenge so I won't have to wait very long to put it into practice! IDEO's design thinking model of Desirability, Feasibility, and Viability (Figure 2) was also mentioned when approaching the process of Design.

Figure 2. Clarke 2023 . IDEO's Design Thinking Model
Figure 2: Clarke 2023 . IDEO's Design Thinking Model

Desirability in regard to whether a solution address a need or pain point of a user or is just a nice to have. Feasibility is related to whether the proposed solution is practical and achievable considering technological or cost constraints and if it builds on the strengths of the business. Viability relates to its business potential, if it has a position in the market and whether it promotes and sustains growth.


I return to the Double Diamond (Figure 3), which is an iconic and well-established framework in UX developed by the British design council and one I have been very keen to explore in more depth. The double diamond uses the 4 D's of design Discover -> Define -> Design -> Deliver. Discover and Design are both Divergent, meaning cultivating a wide array of potential solutions which is useful in preventing dogmatic thinking in the design process. Define and Deliver are Convergent and this is where they refine and narrow down potential solutions. It's important that the double diamond is not taken literally as it should not be considered a linear process as one element could potentially feed into the previous or the next but it's a good conceptual model. I'm really keen to utiles it in my own design process, although throughout this course so far I've probably been subconsciously using something similar, a loose version so to speak - hitting each section naturally during the design process. However, it's good to see each of the expected tasks defined in each section and I'm sure this will allow me to be more deliberate in my process.


Figure 3. Clarke 2023 . British Design Council' s Double Diamond
Figure 3: Clarke 2023 . British Design Council' s Double Diamond

Takeaways


Three questions asked this week to journal about included

  1. What are your biggest takeaways from this week

  2. I want to learn more about

  3. I was surprised that...

  4. I rediscovered...

So ...
  1. Firstly my biggest takeaways is this module will build on GDO710 and will I will probably be a more refined and polished version of what I already am. LJ and the other tutors and peers who have already finished this module have mentioned that this is often cited as the most enjoyable module of the 4 taught so I am keen to see if this holds up. GDO710 was full of creativity and if this continues in UXO720 I will be happy. GDO710 started over a year ago now for me so it'll be fun to see how far I've come and what additional things I can apply from GDO730 and UXO740.

  2. As mentioned before, I would love to learn more about the new prototyping software mentioned in the content, I think I will pick either Framer or Protopie to focus on rather than both, I have heard they have a steep learning curve but I will investigate Linkedin resources on both and see which is the most comprehensive.

  3. I was surprised how the course content this week was both familiar and also refreshing. As I will mention below there were elements that I had previously touched on several years ago but many had been refined in the prevailing years. I was also surprised how the double diamond could be mapped to specific tasks and this is definitely something I will be using in my practice moving forward.

  4. This whole week's material and challenges remind me of my Bachelor's degree in Furniture and Product design some 20 years ago now. The challenge required me to design a physical desk space and I had to utilise drawing skills I hadn't really used in the interluding period and consider aspects like ergonomics and human factors in a physical environment. This is great because who says UX has to be confined to purely digital products? Experiences are experiences, as demonstrated by my research on the Experience Economy in GDO730 (Clarke, 2022:15). This was reinforced in the spark forum by some of my peers who referenced experiences in the physical world as an analogy of UX. Other elements of the course contents, such as the reference to Dete Rams and Donald Norman, Henery Drayfus, and IDEO seem to cement the timelessness of the learning I received 20+ years ago and this will hold me in good stead during this module... hopefully!



References

 

CLARKE. Daniel. 2022. 'Individual Contribution to Artefact'.GDO730, Falmouth University.


KNAPP, Jake, John ZERATSKY, and Barden KOWITZ, B. 2016. Sprint: How to solve big problems and test new ideas in just five days. New York: Simon & Schuster.


RIES, Eric. 2011. The Lean Startup. London: Portfolio Penguin.



Figures

 

Figure 1: CLARKE, Daniel. 2023. Design Foundation and Stanford d.school


Figure 2: CLARKE, Daniel. IDEO's Design Thinking Model


Figure 3: CLARKE, Daniel. 2023. British Design Council's Double Diamond


Recent Posts

See All

コメント


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page