Bracket-Maker
Problem: Making a bracket for a tournament and communicating the timing and matchups to participants is challenging.
Idea: Some single page web app or other application that makes it easy to manage any kind of home spun or official tournament. You enter the participants and their contact info, the tournament setup (single / double elim. etc) and then the bracket is automatically built. Scheduling and notifications would be nice features.
UX Team Members
- Jose Sanchez - ReadME, Sketches, P1: findings, P2: Findings, Conclusions, Caveats, P3: Exec. Summary, Findings: User Test
- William Lyons - Personas & Scenarios, P1 report: Conclusions, Caveats, Wireframe, P2: Methods, P3: Methods, Findings: Pilot Test, Caveats
- Rodrigo Lopez - Sketches, P1 report: Methods P2 Report: Final analysis and Summary Evaluation, P3: Conclusion.
User-Centered Design Artifacts
- Personas and Scenarios
- Sketches and Diagrams
- Wireframes
- Prototype
Phase I: Analyzing Users, Competitors, and Initial Designs
Executive Summary
- Researched competitors using heuristic analysis
- The heuristic analysis will help with improving where competitors did bad and recognizing what competitors did right
- Collaborated and came up with personas and scenarios for website
- Personas and Scenarios help decide what is the optimal and core functionality of the website for our given target user
- Designed wireframes and prototypes of initial website design
- Wireframes and prototypes help with the visualization and building of website given heuristic and personas/scenarios
Full phase I report
Phase II: Refining interaction and designing wireframes
Executive Summary
- Created wireframe design for bracket maker interface.
- Created and designed wireframes with minimal illustration for the necessary elements. Elements like the logos and personas did not have any styling, picture, or color since we focused more on the functionality rather than the appearance/presentation. This helped us make progress towards the project by getting closer to what our protopypes will consist of.
- Cognitive Walkthrough on personas and scenarios.
- While working on our wireframes, we were able to read other team’s Personas and Scenarios while also doing a cognitive walkthrough afterwards. Some things that we learned were how a user learns and navigates through new systems/software that they have never been exposed to.
- Informal user feedback from Software Engineer team
- Through our SE team, we were able to receive some feedback after their first mvp presentation. Some feedback that was brought up was implementing different kinds of tournaments like single elimination, double elimination,and other styles.
- Final Analysis and Summary Evaluation
- During phase II there was more learning compared to phase I. The main reason for this was due to the team being able to do a cognitive walkthrough on the personas as well as the scenarios. The most important takeaway from this was how while we were doing the cognitive walkthoughs we got a different perspective compared as to when we were creating our own. Afterwards we discussed among the group what each person liked and disliked and we use that to implement those toughts into our project. The project is now heading into phase III were prototypes will now be desgined and used instead of sketches and the wireframes. There will also be user testing which during phase I and II did not occured. We expect for user testing to give us a insight and use that to improve areas that need it.
Full phase II report
Phase III: Prototypes and User Testing
Executive Summary
- Conducted Pilot Test
- Within the UX team, we conducted a pilot test to see how prepared we were for a User Test of our prototype. During the pilot test, we realized the tasks were not complete and needed to be redone. The tasks were very broad and didn’t include much website feature usage such as operating a bracket scoreboard and adjusting tournament information such as game, info, and tournament type. Also, we had to expand our prototype to allow for operating a scoreboard and viewing an already available bracket.
- Conducted User Test
- After making the changes, we were ready to conduct a User Test. During the User Test, we found the prototype to be a bigger issue than completing the tasks. We found out that all of our users were able to complete the tasks, but, would miss out on some minor prototype interaction to complete accessory information such as adding player names, bracket name, and team names. This was because the prototype did not do a good job of signaling to the user on a computer that the field is interactable. The interaction would have been more obvious on mobile since a keyboard can pop up when you need to input text. On desktop, a blinking vertical line indicates typeable. Overall, the user test was a success and given more time, the next thing we would be focusing on on refining the prototype to more closely resemble the final product.
Full phase III report