The design thinking process is a purposeful, thoughtful procedure. After spending a considerable amount of time getting to know who the user is and what they want, the next step is for the designer to decide how they can help. This is done by defining the problem.
Problem statements aim to take everything learned in the empathy stage and find the best possible way to help the user. Under the umbrella of defining the problem are Points of View. A POV is a meaningful and actionable statement, articulated by combining prior knowledge of the user, their needs and insights formed during the empathy stage. A good POV solidifies the design vision by defining the main challenges to address throughout the process. POVs are expressed by combining three elements: user, needs, and insight.
Users: The focus of the Design Think Process.
Needs: The goal or demand of the user discovered through interviews, observation, and research analysis. Needs should be stated as verbs.
Insights: The specific problem that needs to be solved. This will mostly come from observations made during the empathy stage. Insights are not typically the reason for the need but rather a synthesized statement formed by analyzing research.
POVs can follow the formulaic sentence:
User (descriptive) needs (verb) because insight (compelling)
A users’ POV gives designers a better understanding of who the user is and helps tell a story. Similar to personas, POVs allow the user to appear as more than a statistic, and lets the designer see who they are designing for from that person’s own perspective.
The design thinking process is always in progress, so even after a product or software has been launched, it can continue to be improved. Drawing again from the empathy stage, designers can look through their reviews and find patterns in the feedback. Positive and negative reviews can vary, either reinforcing that the users’ needs are being met or outlining an uncommon experience. What designers should keep an eye out for are suggestive comments; mostly positive experiences with advice on how they could be improved.
For example, I analyzed delivery app GoPuff.
GoPuff is a delivery app that offers a variety of items ranging from snacks and candy to home goods and personal essentials, and in certain states, alcohol. They advertise fast delivery times and a fixed delivery fee. GoPuff is available in 650 US cities and have approximately 250 fulfillment centers.
A positive review shows the designers that the service meets the users’ needs at a base level. This customer has had good experiences with the added appreciation for the company’s business practices. The designers wouldn’t think they would need to change much based on this review alone.
A negative review proves there is room for improvement. While some negative reviews can be written off as outliers, it’s important to keep tabs on user experiences and notice any patterns that may occur. For example, this is one of many reviews frustrated with the lack of communication with their driver.
A suggestive review is the best place to start making changes. The quickest improvement designers can make is to the software itself. Fixes like these provide a sense of loyalty with the users, letting them know that their opinions and needs matter.
People with limited time and ability to make a trip to the store need quick and easy interface because their time is already limited and glitching software can elongate the process unnecessarily.
People who order delivery need transparent communication with their drivers because lack of communication leaves them feeling frustrated and left in the dark.
See the rest of my analysis here.
It’s important to pay attention to the users’ needs, even after the design has been launched. Users are always willing to share their problems and listening can lead to discovering new problems and design new solutions.
Comments