team-builder

Fabian Garcia

Zane Gabor

Nicholas Shaddox

11 December 2022

Phase III: Prototypes and User Testing

Prototype link

Introduction:

We are Team-Builder. Our application has the goal of assembling teams in an efficient and simple manner. One of the situations we are hoping to solve is collaboration between different classes. While also assembling the teams based on the user’s team preferences.

Methods:

We had student participants (n = 5). We informed them of our studies and had them sign consent forms. Our group had two different protocols: a student, and a professor protocol. We had (n=4) students and (n=1) professor participate in our study. After, we introduced ourselves and went over warm-up questions. We handed them an iPad device loaded with our prototype. For the student protocol, we had them complete 4 tasks. The first task was to join a specific project as a late entry. The second task was to introduce yourself via the chat menu to your group partners. The third task was to locate your group members. The final task was to log out. For the professor protocol, we had 1 participant who completed 4 tasks. The first task was to create the final project. The second task was to remove a specific student from a project. The third task was to dissolve a group and move the group members to new teams. The final task was to remove the collaborative entity.

Student protocol

Warm-up Questions

Have you had or will you have a class that requires group work? If so, were your groups decided for you?

Have you used any apps, websites, or other programs to help you with team build? Which ones?

Do you have a favorite website or app?

Tasks

1: You were a late entry on the project and need to join it manually. The project that you are on is called Obelisk.

2: Part of the assignment is to introduce yourself to your partners and suggest an artist you would like to study.

3: Since you were late to join the project, you are not sure who your partners are. Find out who you are partnered with

4: You are all done with the application and would like to logout.

Debrief Questions

Was the interface familiar to you compared to other applications that you have used?

Had you not used this application, would it have taken you longer to do the same tasks?

How would you descibe this to a friend?

If you had three wishes to make this better for you, what would you wish for? Why?

Professor protocol

Warm-up Questions

Do you have an interest in a software that automates the teambuilding process?

Have you used any apps, websites or other program to hel you with team building?

Do you have any favorite website or app?

Tasks

1: Three of the four projects are already created. Sign in and create the Anubis project.

2: One of your students, Ryan Tanaka, on the Anubis project is dropping the class and will no longer be able to participate in the project. Remove him from the project.

3: One of the projects (Anubis) needs to be dissolved. Remove the project and move the students from this project to the remaining two.

4: It is the end of the semester and the collaborative entity no longer needs to exist. Remove it.

Debrief Questions

Was the interface familiar to you compared to other applications that you have used?

Had you not used this application, would it have taken you longer to do the same tasks?

How would you descibe this to a friend?

If you had three wishes to make this better for you, what would you wish for? Why?

====================================================

Findings Section:

Student protocol:

(Task 1:)

(You were a late entry on the project and need to join it manually. The project that you are on is called Obelisk)

• Most students completed the tasks successfully, but not without problems.
• Although the tasks were completed successfully, some participants mentioned the need for “clarification” or “ intuition” regarding the team/group.
• One participant was afraid of looking around due to fear of “breaking” said prototype.
• All participants completed the task and took the expected path.

(Task 2:)

(Part of the assignment is to introduce yourself to your partners and suggest an artist you would like to study)

• All participants completed the task successfully and most found the chat feature to be in a realistic position. All participants followed the expected path.

(Task 3:)

(Since you were late to join the project, you are not sure who your partners are. Find out who you are partnered with)

• All participants completed the task successfully, and some expressed suggestions to make it more learnable.
• One participant mentioned that the drop-down menu was redundant because it only had one selection.
• Another participant suggested a person icon, which would make it more learnable.

(Task 4:)

(You are all done with the application and would like to logout)

• All participants completed the task successfully but expressed that the feature was unnecessary.
• All of the participants expressed that logging out on a mobile device is not necessary.
• One participant mentioned that asking if they are sure they want to log out is redundant.
• Another participant mentioned that the location of the logout feature was not located in an “intuitive” place.

(Professor protocol)

(Task 1:)

(Three of the four projects have already been created. Sign in and create the Anubis project)

• The task was completed, and the participant expressed that it could have been more intuitive by adding teams.
• The path taken was as expected.

(Task 2:)

(One of your students, Ryan Tanaka, on the Anubis project is dropping the class and will no longer be able to participate in the project. Remove him from the project)

• Task was completed. Professor expressed that the steps to delete students were confusing, but get the job done.

(Task 3:)

(One of the projects (Anubis) needs to be dissolved. Remove the project and move the students from this project to the remaining two.)

• The task was completed and the expected path was taken. No comments were made by the participant.

(Task 4:)

(It is the end of the semester and the collaborative entity no longer needs to exist. Remove it.)

• Task was completed to a degree. A participant expressed a desire to keep the collaborative entity for record’s sake. Potential feature inbound.

Conclusions:

(Discoveries)

• Single button to view group members(drop-down redundant)
• Logout button/feature pointless
• Person icon instead of gear (learnable)
• Add a feature to archive past collaborations
• Make a better distinction between group/team

(Interpret findings)

• Tasks may not have been complex enough to test the true functionality of the application
• Some features could be reworked to be more learnable
• Most things tested were basic features, not prime function

(Describe Recommendations)

• Rework some of the features of the UI to incorporate the results from the study
• Rework prototype to test prime features of the application (team building)
• Redesign tasks to target prime features of the application

Caveats:

• Limited testing pool
• All participants are technical

(Explanation) Since the testing pool of participants was so small, it could affect the reliability of the results. We essentially had only one participant for the professor protocol, which limits our results to that participant’s point of view. Another issue was that all of the participants were sourced from our computer science department, which has a more technical audience than the general population. This bias can affect results by introducing participants who have a higher chance of knowing how to maneuver a GUI / Web App.