Abstract
This essay is about how the prototyping process and be effective with the use of manifestation and filtering dimensions. How big of a role user testing plays in efficient design practice. The insights come from on a project where we needed to make a prototype based on communication in sports, where the user would not be able to use both hands to answer a call or communicate to others generally.
Introduction
Effectiveness in prototyping could be based on multiple criteria’s during the different phases of the design process. This essay will be about prototyping efficiently through an exploration of what the implications are for design practices, as well as if the framework a practical one and what the challenges and opportunities might be with prototyping efficiently. The project that will be referred to is Project 2, where we had been given a design brief based on communication in sports while your hands are busy. This had limitations on what the prototype could not be, such as something that would change the sport that it was intended for. Through prototyping everything you produce can be used as knowledge of what the artefact is going to be by knowing what it is not going to be.
Exploration of Ideas
One way to reach effectiveness is through pushing the boundary and exploring different ideas. It could be said that while sketching you get too hung up with your ideas, which you do not try and push the idea to the next level or find that it is a dead end. Even then a designer would have a narrower idea of what a prototype is going to be, by knowing what it’s not going to be. An example could be during Project 2, in the group we were making a 5 button programable controller for people doing sports. In the beginning we were invested in this idea of having a removeable buttons since the user might not need 5 different commands so why not give the user the option to have 2 or 3 buttons. We decided to make a quick and dirty prototype aiming to have a look & feel prototype. After that we tried to push ourselves more by coming up with more options that made us end up with a circular model with four buttons around and a circular one in the middle. This corresponds to what Michael Schrage wrote in ‘Crafting Interactions: The Purpose & Practice of Serious Play. In Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century’ he stated the following on how a prototype is like a hypothesis part where he has a list of why that is, number 4 states “A mere assumption or guess” (Schrage, 2013). This raised the question of the real need to limit something that does not need to be limited since we were assuming a need or an unnecessary feature for the users. That in return helped us get a narrower idea of what we can explore and to continue ideating.
Trying to Break the Idea
Having alternatives to an idea is an ideal place to be in the design space. Exploring different features or untapped areas of a design could push your prototype to different level. Furthermore, input from potential users is very important in being efficient during the design process. User testing is a vital part of prototyping, since you get too connected to your ideas. “Prototyping is key means with which an individual\s imagination is tenaciously explored, tested, broken and rebuilt” (Valentine, 2013). This can show that people get too used to comfortable with their idea that they think is perfect, but they must continue pushing the idea to be broken as Valentine states. A great quote in ’The Anatomy of Prototypes is that’ we conceptualize prototypes as tools for traversing a design space where all possible design alternatives and their rationales can be explored” (Lim, Stolterman & Tenenberg, 2008) which is what we tried to do until the end. We went from getting too focused on one idea we had and needed to take a step back to try to break the idea a part. For example, we tried to find the breaking point of how many commands you can have. We did that by using combinations to see when it would be more convenient for the user to just take out their phone rather than use the device. Moving from the superficial design space where it’s all based on what the designers think is needed is different from finding people in your target user group and asking questions. During the project, it became clearer when we interviewed people about what they needed by giving us feedback based on the different options we presented. For example, when interviewing people in the diving business they said that having buttons was better than a rotating nob controller. Decisions similar to that cannot be made as a hypothesis at that point but based on user testing methods.
Using filter dimensions
A vital part of being in the prototyping phase is using filtering dimensions. Prototyping profiles is a description of each single prototype based on the prototype’s anatomy of prototypes (Lim, Stolterman & Tenenberg, 2008). Each example could be when certain parts of a design are prototyped rather than completed in full. Filtering dimensions is made of 5 different groups which include Appearance, Data, Functionality, Interactivity, Spatial structure. During the project we had focused on different part to explore near the end of the design process, where one pair focused on the functionality through interviews with potential users. For appearance a pair was exploring different ways to make the prototype look like in different situations. The last pair concentrated on the interactivity and spatial structure through experience prototyping. We did not concentrate on Data until the end where we had to make a choice if we should include numbers on the remote pad or not. ” the best prototype is one that, in the simplest and most efficient way, makes the possibilities and limitations of a design idea visible and measurable.” (Lim, Stolterman & Tenenberg, 2019). Through the use of high-fidelity sketches of many alternatives of what we found limitations and breaking the ideas a part to make it more measurable and ideal for the sports we were focusing on. Functionality is something we had explore well since in the beginning we were only thinking of how a person doing a sport can communicate with others. For example, sending a pre-programmed message when someone is calling you. We then thought of how we can make a communication channel for people using the device, that is when we explored how each colour would mean a specific thing chosen by the pair. By doing that we achieved a sharper narrower position of what this device is going to be.
Using Manifestation dimensions
Using manifestation dimensions could play a huge role and how to view the design practise. Manifestation dimensions focuses on Material, Resolution, and Scope. While working we had an idea of what materials our prototype would be made of. It is about limiting ourselves of what we should do.” the best prototype is one that, in the simplest and most efficient way, makes the possibilities and limitations of a design idea visible and measurable.” (Lim, Stolterman & Tenenberg, 2019). We knew what we needed to do in making it in physical media. Moreover, knowing what tools we have at our disposal. For resolution we achieved that by showing the interaction part of the prototype where we used Adobe XD. We used it to show what happens when a button is pressed and the feedback one would get. For scope we chose different colors alluding to the different messages as a means of communication on the interface. By using the manifestation dimensions, we can have a more efficient design practice since one would know what to focus on, in return the idea would be sharper than it would had been. Furthermore, it can mean saving time and material. Limiting the idea is best to do in the design practice. An example of that is that we realized it was unrealistic that we make a device that would be perfect for every single sport for communication. After we focused on two sports, biking and swimming we thought of how it could be implemented in other sports. We found an opportunity to have it in the setting of working out in the gym and skating. We found this out through experience prototyping and interviewing people who do recreational sports to see if this would be of use. The idea came initially since we found an article about how people lose in focus through smartphones ruins the workout.
Importance of User Testing
During this process many can run into issues with knowing when it is time to go to the next step. You can not follow a plan fully, since sometimes you are behind and sometimes you might jump stages within the process. It is crucial to try to question everything by user testing method of think aloud method to see how a subject from the target user would make sense of things. By just hearing the pace that they are talking in could relate to the analytical focus, as well as understand potential users reasoning. Keep in mind that this method has disadvantages such as it being a situated use tends to diminish, adding on self-reports not being authentic or complete thought. User testing is an important tool to confirm real need and applicability of a prototype.
Conclusion
In conclusion, efficiency could be different things in the design space. Exploring ideas that you try, and break is vital. Getting feedback from potential users throughout the process is of value that aids an efficient design process. That is because designers can know if an idea has real need. Furthermore, being able to really take the time and use the filtering and manifestation dimensions could improve the prototype. The dimensions could sharpen and make the design practice much more efficient since it focuses on the important parts of the process. More effective not only in time but material as well. Quick and dirty prototypes can be very useful since you can have a look & feel of the design and see if you can manifest the idea. All these different things help in making a narrower and sharper idea of what you are prototyping.
Bibliography
Buchenau, M. & Suri, J. F. (2000). Experience prototyping. In Proc. DIS, 424-433. ACM.
Lim, Y.-K., Stolterman, E., & Tenenberg, J. (2008). The Anatomy of Prototypes: Prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 15(2).
Schrage, M. (2013). Crafting Interactions: The Purpose & Practice of Serious Play. In
Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century, p19–28.
Valentine, L. (2013) Prototype: Design and craft in the 21st century. Bloomsbury Academic, London
Abdulrahman's Blog 