If you missed our recent live training on Prototype Testing, don’t worry—we’ve got everything you need right here! You can catch up at your convenience, so grab a cup of tea, put your feet up, and enjoy the show.
In the session, we explored the powerful new features of our Prototype Testing tool, offering a step-by-step guide to setting up, running, and analyzing your tests like a seasoned pro. This tool is a game-changer for your design workflow, helping you identify usability issues and gather real user feedback before committing significant resources to development.
Here’s a quick recap of the highlights:
1. Creating a prototype test from scratch using images
We walked through how to create a prototype test from scratch using static images. This method is perfect for early-stage design concepts, where you want to quickly test user flows without a fully interactive prototype.
2. Preparing your Figma prototype for testing
Figma users, we’ve got you covered! We discussed how to prepare your Figma prototype for the smoothest possible testing experience. From setting up interactions to ensuring proper navigation, these tips ensure participants have an intuitive experience during the test. For more detailed instructions, check out our help article
3. Seamless Figma prototype imports
One of the standout features of the tool is its seamless integration with Figma. We showed how easy it is to import your designs directly from Figma into Optimal, streamlining the setup process. You can bring your working files straight in, and resync when you need to with one click of a button.
4. Understanding usability metrics and analyzing results
We explored how to analyze the usability metrics, and walked through what the results can indicate on click maps and paths. These visual tools allow you to see exactly how participants navigate your design, making it easier to spot pain points, dead ends, or areas of friction. By understanding user behavior, you can rapidly iterate and refine your prototypes for optimal user experience.
What happens when you mix New Zealand's finest chocolate with 870 of Europe's brightest UX minds? Pure magic, as we discovered at UXDX Dublin 2024!
A sweet start
Our UXDX journey began with pre-event drinks (courtesy of yours truly, Optimal Workshop) and a special treat from down under - a truckload of Whittaker's chocolate that quickly became the talk of the conference. Our impromptu card sorting exercise with different Whittaker's flavors revealed some interesting preferences, with Coconut Slab emerging as the clear favorite among attendees!
Cross-Functional Collaboration: More Than Just a Buzzword
The conference's core theme of breaking down silos between design, product, and engineering teams resonated deeply with our mission at Optimal Workshop. Andrew Birgiolas from Sephora delivered what I call a "magical performance" on collaboration as a product, complete with an unforgettable moment where he used his shoe to demonstrate communication scenarios (now that's what we call thinking on your feet!).
Purpose-driven design
Frank Gaine's session on organizational purpose was a standout moment, emphasizing the importance of alignment at three crucial levels:
- Company purpose
- Team purpose
- Individual purpose
This multi-layered approach to purpose struck a chord with attendees, reminding us that effective UX research and design must be anchored in clear, meaningful objectives at every level.
The art of communication
One of the most practical takeaways came from Kelle Link's session on navigating enterprise ecosystems. Her candid discussion about the necessity of becoming proficient in deck creation sparked knowing laughter from the audience. As our CEO noted, it's a crucial skill for communicating with senior leadership, board members, and investors - even if it means becoming a "deck ninja" (to use a more family-friendly term).
Standardization meets innovation
Chris Grant's insights on standardization hit home: "You need to standardize everything so things are predictable for a team." This seemingly counterintuitive approach to fostering innovation resonated with our own experience at Optimal Workshop - when the basics are predictable, teams have more bandwidth for tackling the unpredictable challenges that drive real innovation.
Building impactful product teams
Matt Fenby-Taylor's discussion of the "pirate vs. worker bee" persona balance was particularly illuminating. Finding team members who can maintain that delicate equilibrium between creative disruption and methodical execution is crucial for building truly impactful product teams.
Research evolution
A key thread throughout the conference was the evolution of UX research methods. Nadine Piecha's "Beyond Interviews" session emphasized that research is truly a team sport, requiring involvement from designers, PMs, and other stakeholders. This aligns perfectly with our mission at Optimal Workshop to make research more accessible and actionable for everyone.
The AI conversation
The debate on AI's role in design and research between John Cleere and Kevin Hawkins sparked intense discussions. The consensus? AI will augment rather than replace human researchers, allowing us to focus more on strategic thinking and deeper insights - a perspective that aligns with our own approach to integrating AI capabilities.
Looking ahead
As we reflect on UXDX 2024, a few things are clear:
The industry is evolving rapidly, but the fundamentals of human-centered design remain crucial
Cross-functional collaboration isn't just nice to have - it's essential for delivering impactful products
The future of UX research and design is bright, with teams becoming more integrated and methodologies more sophisticated
The power of community
Perhaps the most valuable aspect of UXDX wasn't just the formal sessions, but the connections made over coffee (which we were happy to provide!) and, yes, New Zealand chocolate. The mix of workshops, forums, and networking opportunities created an environment where ideas could flow freely and partnerships could form naturally.
What's next?
As we look forward to UXDX 2025, we're excited to see how these conversations evolve. Will AI transform how we approach UX research? How will cross-functional collaboration continue to develop? And most importantly, which Whittaker's chocolate flavor will reign supreme next year?
One thing's for certain - the UX community is more vibrant and collaborative than ever, and we're proud to be part of its evolution. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the industry has a very bright future.
See you next year! We’ll remember to bring more Coconut Slab chocolate next time - it seems we've created quite a demand!
“If storymapping could unearth patterns and bring together a cohesive story that engages audiences in the world of entertainment and film, why couldn’t we use a similar approach to engage our audiences?’Donna Lichaw and Lis Hubert
User Experience work makes the most sense to me in the context of storytelling. So when I saw Donna Lichaw and Lis Hubert’s presentation on storymapping at edUi recently, it resonated. A user’s path through a website can be likened to the traditional storytelling structure of crisis or conflict, exposition — and even a climax or two.
The narrative arc and the user experience
So just how can the same structure that suits fairytales help us to design a compelling experience for our customers? Well, storyboarding is an obvious example of how UX design and storytelling mesh. A traditional storyboard for a movie or TV episode lays out sequential images to help visualize what the final production will show. Similarly, we map out users' needs and journeys via wireframes, sketches, and journey maps, all the while picturing how people will actually interact with the product.
But the connection between storytelling and the user experience design process goes even deeper than that. Every time a user interacts with our website or product, we get to tell them a story. And a traditional literary storytelling structure maps fairly well to just how users interact with the digital stories we’re telling.Hence Donna and Lis’ conception of storymapping as ‘a diagram that maps out a story using a traditional narrative structure called a narrative arc.’ They concede that while ‘using stories in UX design...is nothing new’, a ‘narrative-arc diagram could also help us to rapidly assess content strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities.’
Storytelling was a common theme at edUI
The edUi conference in Richmond, Virginia brought together an assembly of people who produce websites or web content for large institutions. I met people from libraries, universities, museums, various levels of government, and many other places. The theme of storytelling was present throughout, both explicitly and implicitly.Keynote speaker Matt Novak from Paleofuture talked about how futurists of the past tried to predict the future, and what we can learn from the stories they told. Matthew Edgar discussed what stories our failed content tell — what story does a 404 page tell? Or a page telling users they have zero search results? Two great presentations that got me thinking about storytelling in a different way.
Ultimately, it all clicked for me when I attended Donna and Lis’ presentation ‘Storymapping: A Macguyver Approach to Content Strategy’ (and yes, it was as compelling as the title suggests). They presented a case study of how they applied a traditional narrative structure to a website redesign process. The basic story structure we all learned in school usually includes a pretty standard list of elements. Donna and Lis had tweaked the definitions a bit, and applied them to the process of how users interact with web content.
Points on the Narrative Arc (from their presentation)
Exposition — provides crucial background information and often ends with ‘inciting incident’ kicking off the rest of the story
Donna and Lis pointed out that in the context of doing content strategy work, the inciting incident could be the problem that kicks off a development process. I think it can also be the need that brings users to a website to begin with.
Rising Action — Building toward the climax, users explore a website using different approaches
Here I think the analogy is a little looser. While a story can sometimes be well-served by a long and winding rising action, it’s best to keep this part of the process a bit more straightforward in web work. If there’s too much opportunity for wandering, users may get lost or never come back.
Crisis / Climax — The turning point in a story, and then when the conflict comes to a peak
The crisis is what leads users to your site in the first place — a problem to solve, an answer to find, a purchase to make. And to me the climax sounds like the aha! moment that we all aspire to provide, when the user answers their question, makes a purchase, or otherwise feels satisfied from using the site. If a user never gets to this point, their story just peters out unresolved. They’re forced to either begin the entire process again on your site (now feeling frustrated, no doubt), or turn to a competitor.
Falling Action — The story or user interaction starts to wind down and loose ends are tied up
A confirmation of purchase is sent, or maybe the user signs up for a newsletter.
Denouement / Resolution — The end of the story, the main conflict is resolved
The user goes away with a hopefully positive experience, having been able to meet their information or product needs. If we’re lucky, they spread the word to others!Check out Part 2 of Donna and Lis' three-part article on storymapping. I definitely recommend exploring their ideas in more depth, and having a go at mapping your own UX projects to the above structure.
A word about crises. The idea of a ‘crisis’ is at the heart of the narrative arc. As we know from watching films and reading novels, the main character always has a problem to overcome. So crisis and conflict show up a few times through this process.While the word ‘crisis’ carries some negative connotations (and that clearly applies to visiting a terribly designed site!), I think it can be viewed more generally when we apply the term to user experience. Did your user have a crisis that brought them to your site? What are they trying to resolve by visiting it? Their central purpose can be the crisis that gives rise to all the other parts of their story.
Why storymapping to a narrative arc is good for your design
Mapping a user interaction along the narrative arc makes it easy to spot potential points of frustration, and also serves to keep the inciting incident or fundamental user need in the forefront of our thinking. Those points of frustration and interaction are natural fits for testing and further development.
For example, if your site has a low conversion rate, that translates to users never hitting the climactic point of their story. It might be helpful to look at their interactions from the earlier phases of their story before they get to the climax. Maybe your site doesn’t clearly establish its reason for existing (exposition), or it might be too hard for users to search and explore your content (rising action).Guiding the user through each phase of the structure described above makes it more difficult to skip an important part of how our content is found and used.
We can ask questions like:
How does each user task fit into a narrative structure?
Are we dumping them into the climax without any context?
Does the site lack a resolution or falling action?
How would it feel to be a user in those situations?
These questions bring up great objectives for qualitative testing — sitting down with a user and asking them to show us their story.
What to do before mapping to narrative arc
Many sessions at edUi also touched on analytics or user testing. In crafting a new story, we can’t ignore what’s already in place — especially if some of it is appreciated by users. So before we can start storymapping the user journey, we need to analyze our site analytics, and run quantitative and qualitative user tests. This user research will give us insights into what story we’re already telling (whether it’s on purpose or not).
What’s working about the narrative, and what isn’t? Even if a project is starting from scratch on a new site, your potential visitors will bring stories of their own. It might be useful to check stats to see if users leave early on in the process, during the exposition phase. A high bounce rate might mean a page doesn't supply that expositional content in a way that's clear and engaging to encourage further interaction.Looking at analytics and user testing data can be like a movie's trial advance screening — you can establish how the audience/users actually want to experience the site's content.
How mapping to the narrative arc is playing out in my UX practice
Since I returned from edUi, I've been thinking about the narrative structure constantly. I find it helps me frame user interactions in a new way, and I've already spotted gaps in storytelling that can be easily filled in. My attention instantly went to the many forms on our site. What’s the Rising Action like at that point? Streamlining our forms and using friendly language can help keep the user’s story focused and moving forward toward clicking that submit button as a climax.
I’m also trying to remember that every user is the protagonist of their own story, and that what works for one narrative might not work for another. I’d like to experiment with ways to provide different kinds of exposition to different users. I think it’s possible to balance telling multiple stories on one site, but maybe it’s not the best idea to mix exposition for multiple stories on the same page.And I also wonder if we could provide cues to a user that direct them to exposition for their own inciting incident...a topic for another article perhaps.What stories are you telling your users? Do they follow a clear arc, or are there rough transitions? These are great questions to ask yourself as you design experiences and analyze existing ones. The edUi conference was a great opportunity to investigate these ideas, and I can’t wait to return next year.
Ahead of her talk at UX New Zealand 2016, Lana Gibson from Lanalytics writes about a project she worked on with Te Papa.Te Papa (a museum in Wellington, New Zealand) created audience personas based on user research, and I used these as a basis to create audience segments in Google Analytics to give us further insight into different groups. By regularly engaging with our audience using both qualitative and quantitative user insight methods, we’re starting to build up a three-dimensional picture of their needs and how Te Papa can serve them.
Personas based on user research
At Te Papa the digital team created six audience personas to inform their site redesign, based on user research:
enthusiast
tourist
social
educator
volunteer
Wellingtonian
These formed a good basis for understanding why people are using the site. For example the educator persona wants fodder for lesson plans for her class — trustworthy, subject-based resources that will excite her students. The tourist persona wants practical information — what’s on, how to plan a visit. And they want to get this information quickly and get on with their visit.We’ll follow the tourist persona through a couple more rounds of user research, to give an example of what you can find out by segmenting your audience.
Interpreting tourist needs with data
Te Papa holds information for the Tourist audience in the Visit and What’s on sections of the site. I created a segment in Google Analytics which filters the reports to show how people who visit pages within these two sections interact with the whole site. For example the keywords they search for in Google before arriving on Te Papa, what they search for when on the site, and how many of them email us.Deeper digging revealed that the Tourist audience makes up about half of our overall audience. Because the content is useful to everyone wanting to visit the museum, and not just tourists, we broadened the scope of this persona and called the segment ‘Museum visitor’.
Why segment by site category — what if the audience goes beyond these pages?
Google Analytics segments allow you to see all the pages that a particular audience visits, not just the ones you’ve filtered. For example over 2,000 people who visited a page within the Visit and What’s on sections also visited the Kids and families section in July 2016. So, the audience segment allows us to expand our concept of our audiences.You can segment by a lot of different behaviors. For example you could segment visitors by keyword, isolating people who come to the site from Google after searching for ‘parking’ and ‘opening hours’ and seeing what they do afterwards. But segmenting by site category tests the information architecture of your site, which can be very useful if you’ve got it wrong!
Visit persona wants opening hours information
What did we learn from these personas? One example is that the most searched term on the site for the Visit persona was ‘opening hours’. To help fix this, the team put the opening hours on every page of the redesigned site:
This resulted in a 90% drop in searches that include ‘hours’ (May 2016 compared with May 2015):
Developing personas with Matariki
After the re-design the team ran a project to increase the reach and engagement of the Te Papa Matariki audience. You can read more about this in "Using data to help people celebrate Matariki". Te Papa holds Matariki events in the museum, such as the Kaumātua kapa haka, and this event in particular enhanced and challenged our ideas about this audience.
The Kaumātua kapa haka is the biggest Matariki event held at Te Papa, and this year we had 4,000 unique page views to the two Kaumātua kapa haka event pages. Traffic spiked over the event weekend, particularly from Facebook and mobile devices. We assumed the traffic was from people who were planning to come to the event, as they sit in the What’s on section. But further analysis indicates that people were visiting for the live streaming of the event — we included embedded Youtube videos on these pages.The popularity of the videos suggests that we’re taking events held within the museum walls out to people on the move, or in the comfort of their own homes. Based on this insight we’re looking into live streaming more events.
We’ve taken Te Papa personas through three iterations, based on user research, analytics, then a practical application of these to the Matariki festival. Each user research method has limitations, but by regularly using qualitative and quantitative methods we’re engaging with a three dimensional view of our audience that’s constantly evolving. Each user research piece builds that view, and allows us to plan projects and site changes with greater clarity about what our users need. It means we can plan projects that will have real and measurable impact, and allow people to engage with Te Papa in useful and meaningful ways.
Want to hear more? Come to UX New Zealand!
If you'd like to hear more about how Lana and Ruth redesigned the Te Papa website, plus a bunch of other cool UX-related talks, head along to UX New Zealand 2016 hosted by Optimal Workshop. The conference runs from 12-14 October, 2016, including a day of fantastic workshops, and you can get your tickets here. Got some questions you'd like to ask Lana before the conference? You can Tweet her on @lanalytics00!
.png)
