Reflecting on my empathy phase in my human-centred design process I attempted to incorporate the feedback I received on my last blog. My colleagues all agreed that additionally to my survey I needed to contact my participants and conduct a face to face interview. Heck expressed “ I find that a written exercise does not provide the same feedback as an in-person conversation as occasionally the respondent rushes through the answers just to complete the questionnaire” (Comment section) and Sharpe added, “surveys/questionnaires might not elicit the type of feedback gained from one-on-one conversations” (Comment section). These opinions are supported by Warman (2015), who claims “Although [surveys] work well to provide a superficial level of knowledge, there are limits to surveys that block the development of empathy” (Achieving empathy section). I followed up and contacted two participants and heard back from one. However, the challenges of time and summer vacations prevented us to connect prior to this blog post and prior to the assignment due this Sunday. I intend to follow through with a personal interview and hope to incorporate the results into my final assignment for LRNT 527.
Following the empathy phase for my design challenge, I am moving into the define phase and I will use the following methods from IDEO. (2019) to synthesize the findings from my questionnaire: Download Your Learnings, Find Themes and Create Insight Statements. ‘Download Your Learnings’ provides the opportunity to gather all information gathered in one place, sort and resort it until one is able to discern a thread of commonality amongst the data collected. ‘Find Themes’ helps to clarify any threads emerging from my downloaded learnings. Once the theme is identified I will move on to create insight statements. ‘Create Insight Statements’ assists in moving forward with a specific direction. To help me create the statements I will use a Point-of-View (POV) formula: Who is the user, what is their need and why is this insightful? (Wollery, 2017, p.33). The POV statements will engage me in a rephrasing of my original stated question. The reframing process may change the perspective of my design challenge and open the possibility for multiple solutions I may not have considered yet (Seelig, 2013). It will allow me to incorporate the feedback I received and create a human centred design question that focuses on user needs.
References
Hain, J. (2015, July 7). Profiles-human-story-zen-question [Digital Image]. Retrieved from https://pixabay.com/illustrations/profiles-human-story-zen-question-833594/ofil
Heck, T. (2019, June 29). Creating Effective Mentorship. Comment. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0053/creating-effective-mentorship/#comment-74
IDEO. (2015). Design Kit – Methods. Retrieved from http://www.designkit.org/methods
Seelig, T. (2013). How reframing a problem unlocks innovation. Retrieved from https://www.fastcodesign.com/1672354/how-reframing-a-problem-unlocks-innovation
Sharpe, M. (2019, June 30). Creating Effective Mentorship. Comment. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0053/creating-effective-mentorship/#comment-74
Warman, G. (2015). Using design thinking in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2015/1/using-design-thinking-in-higher-education
Wollery, E. (2017). Design thinking handbook. Retrieved from https://www.designbetter.co/design-thinking
