How to improve the user experience of Microsoft Teams mobile app onboarding.
Looking for the solutions.
Week 3
Paper prototype design of solutions of MS Teams onboarding to address a user’s needs by applying principles of design, critical thinking and problem-solving.
“Design is not art. It is about crafting solutions to real issues.”
Mark Boulton
We focused on creating paper prototype designs for MS Teams onboarding. By applying design principles, critical thinking, and problem-solving, we aimed to address user needs effectively. The paper prototypes allowed us to visualize and iterate on intuitive and user-friendly solutions without extensive development. This process involved evaluating designs, anticipating challenges, and generating innovative approaches. These prototypes serve as a foundation for future development and refinement.
Paper Prototype
Problem
The existing onboarding process fails to provide users with a clear understanding of the capabilities and functionalities of the application.
To address this problem, we began by sketching out our ideas on paper. Each team member brought their own unique perspective, resulting in a wealth of creative and original ideas. We engaged in discussions and utilized Miro boards for brainstorming, consolidating our ideas in one central location.
Version 1
Initially, we compiled all our proposed solutions and deliberated on which solution to choose and why. Our focus centered on an approach that would educate users about the various features of the application, specifically highlighting the availability of help and learning resources (Oksiuta, 2017; Thornton, 2019) (Appendix 1).
The new features we introduced encompassed easily skippable tips for users who preferred to explore the application independently, as well as video tutorials that offered users more options for learning about the application’s functionalities.
The first version of the onboarding process consisted of two levels: one for logged-in users and another specifically tailored to users who were logging in for the first time.
Version 2
During the development of our paper prototype, we recognized that the two-level onboarding approach could be frustrating for users. Having them encounter onboarding windows before logging in and then receiving another set of instructions after logging in seemed redundant. As a result, in the second version of our paper prototype, we made the decision to eliminate the initial onboarding windows before the login process. This modification aimed to streamline the user experience and reduce any potential frustration for users.
Version 3
Following the feedback received from testing version 2 of our prototype, we focused on incorporating changes to further enhance the onboarding journey. In version 3, we aimed to make the onboarding process even simpler and more user-friendly.
To achieve this, we introduced an option to close the onboarding at any time, providing users with the flexibility to navigate the application independently. Additionally, we implemented a search functionality that allows users to easily seek help by entering keywords or full sentences, ensuring quick access to relevant assistance.
Usability Testing. Planning. Implementation and Evaluation.
Our objective for the first usability test was twofold: to collect valuable feedback and assess the usability of the newly designed onboarding experience, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the instructional onboarding for users (Tubik Studio, 2017).
To ensure a well-executed usability test, we carefully planned the testing process. This involved determining the target user group, selecting appropriate testing methods and tools, and defining specific tasks and scenarios for participants to complete during the test.
To gather feedback and foster idea sharing, we presented our users with the paper prototype and invited them to provide their input. We facilitated discussions where users could share their thoughts, ideas, and potential solutions regarding the onboarding experience.
However, due to the limitations of interactivity inherent in the paper prototype, we recognized the need for a more dynamic and interactive platform. To address this, we decided to create interactive screens using the Marvell app.
By transitioning to the Marvell app, we aimed to enhance the user experience and provide a more realistic and immersive representation of the onboarding process. This interactive approach would allow users to explore and interact with the screens, enabling a better understanding of the proposed solutions and facilitating more valuable feedback.
After conducting the testing phase, we proceeded to evaluate the feedback received. Based on this evaluation, we made the decision to implement changes to the prototype.
To effectively address the identified issues, we prioritized the problems that needed to be solved. Subsequently, we developed the next version of our paper prototype with the goal of meeting the expectations and requirements of users regarding the MS Teams’ onboarding experience.
In this updated version of the prototype, our primary focus was on creating an easily accessible help and learning feature. We recognized the importance of providing users with seamless access to resources that would assist them in navigating and understanding the application.
Reflection
This week presented us with a series of questions, problems, and goals, but our focus remained on finding solutions. We focused on improving the existing onboarding experience of Microsoft Teams and enhance the overall user experience.
We contemplated various aspects: how to define clear goals for the onboarding process, how to design it in a way that facilitates easy and quick user understanding of the application, and whether to adopt existing patterns used by competitors or create a new mental model and pattern.
The process of creating drawings and iterating on screens was challenging, requiring multiple revisions. While the paper prototype served as a great starting point for generating solutions, we discovered that the mobile prototype in Marvell worked better for testing and observing user reactions.
A crucial lesson learned was the importance of asking the right questions and allowing users to contribute their own ideas and opinions during feedback sessions. This encompassed both positive and negative feedback relating to usability, enabling us to maximize the benefits derived from user insights.
Key takeaways from this week
- finding creative ways to solve user problems,
- prioritizing existing mental models to enhance familiarity and ease of use,
- understanding the significance of common design patterns (Jakob’s law),
- effectively demonstrating, comparing, and testing design ideas.
- I also gained knowledge in evaluating prototypes and consciously developing new iterations based on user feedback for subsequent testing.
Overall, this week emphasized the iterative nature of user-centered design and highlighted the value of productive brainstorming sessions to uncover the best solutions that align with user needs, guided by insights derived from usability test analysis.
References
Downs, J. (2020). User onboarding: 11 best practices and 15 examples. https://www.justinmind.com/blog/user-onboarding/
Joyce, A. (2020). Mobile-App Onboarding: An Analysis of Components and Techniques. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/mobile-app-onboarding/#:~:text=We%20define%20onboarding%20as%20the,also%20completing%20any%20necessary%20setup.
Margolis, M. (2011). Questions to ask before starting user research. https://library.gv.com/questions-to-ask-before-starting-user-research-4607c2633f6f#.5q2b5258w
Mifsud, J. Usability Testing Of Mobile Applications: A Step-By-Step Guide. https://usabilitygeek.com/usability-testing-mobile-applications/
Oksiuta, G. (2017). 10 Steps for better Onboarding Experience. https://uxdesign.cc/better-onboarding-3732c09b4bb1
Thornton, P. (2019). How to do paper prototyping, the UX tool you may be missing. https://uxdesign.cc/how-to-do-paper-prototyping-719173215a7e
Tubik Studio. (2017). Tests Go First. Usability Testing in Design. https://uxplanet.org/tests-go-first-usability-testing-in-design-574ffa18d81
Yablonski, J. (2020). Laws of UX. Using Psychology to Design Better Products & Services. O’Reilly.
