As part of the Collaborative Design course at Olin, I collaborated with 4 other students on a semester long project to create a futuristic design solution for a key challenge that park rangers face. We completed a full discovery and engaged with the design process through user research, co-design, and ideating phases in a studio environment guided by our course instructors.
We completed the project with a presentation of our solution, Spore Spray. Spore spray is a blue-sky, futuristic solution uses mushrooms to biologically degrade trash and provides a quick and easy way for rangers to eliminate litter, relieving the need for park rangers to personally deal with the trash.
Tools and Skills: User research, co-design, information synthesis and analysis, product requirements, communication
Recruit and engage with park maintenence workers
Debrief conversations as a team and create people portraits containing information about each stakeholder
Create attribute/personality spectrums and synthesize information into 3 distinct customer personas
Ideate 100+ raw ideas including ambitious and unexpected ideas
Identify customer and designer values to see where we converge and diverge.
Lead 4+ co-design meetings using card sorting, sketching, and other methods
Narrow down ideas and create gallery sketches for ~9 solutions
Choose a final solution to develop into a thorough solution
Establish the form, scale, and interfaces of the design through a detailed requirements table with metrics
Diagram the interaction of various stakeholders with the design through a broad interaction map
Develop the interfaces of the product through a visual sketch model
In this first phase, we reached out to and interviewed 10 different park maintenance workers and park rangers. We split into teams of 2 and conducted engagements over Zoom, went to parks in-person, and over the phone. After each engagement, we debriefed with the entire team and created a people portrait for each park worker we met with. To protect the privacy of our stakeholders, all names and locations are pseudonymized.
For each engagement, we wrote down customer goals, some meaningful and memorable quotes, some challenges they faced, what they did in their daily life, and some gear and tools they used. These customer portraits were used to debrief each engagement and make sure all team members were aware of information collected during the engagement.
Once we had debriefed all of the workers we had engaged with, we created frameworks to help generalize information for our stakeholder group as a whole. We plotted our customers on an OCEAN attribute spectrum and several 2x2 Matrices to identify similarities in personality traits and motivations. These frameworks were helpful in creating our 3 customer personas that represent our stakeholder group: Scholar Sam, Dutiful Dakota, and Pioneer Peyton.
The 2x2 matrices had the following axis labels:
We then created 3 personas to represent the park rangers we engaged with:
In this phase, we started by identifying areas of opportunity that we could explore for our design solutions. These areas were pulled directly from themes of challenges our customers face in their daily work that we identified in our findings during the previous phase. My team then challenged ourselves to generate 100 broad ideas that we plotted using the Fanciful Horizon method to easily see what ideas are bold to push our thinking in lateral and impactful ways. We then created gallery sketches for several ideas that we wanted to test with our customer group.
We conducted 5 different co-design sessions with our stakeholders. The goals of these meetings were to receive feedback on preliminary ideas that we ideated as a team and to provide opportunities for our stakeholders to be part of the design process. The methods that we used were Card Sorting and Props to gain a deeper understanding on values that our stakeholders have and to allow them to try out and engage with some of our design ideas. Our co-designs took place in person or over Zoom and on Miro.
We debriefed our co-design sessions as a team and incorporated the feedback to continue refining and generating idea. By the end of the phase, we had 9 bold ideas represented as a gallery sketch that was build upon our personas, values, areas of opportunity, and co-design sessions. These 9 ideas are categorized into 3 broader convergent directions: Documentation and accessibility of information, Park User Safety, and Waste Management.
The focus of the final phase was to choose a conceptual idea and to further develop it into a detailed design proposal. My team first started by choosing one of the 3 directions we had identified in the previous phase. We chose to develop an idea in the Waste Management direction because one of our designer values was to push our creativity in designing a bold idea and to work on something physical and tangible, as opposed to an app.
Once we narrowed down the direction to pursue, we spent several meetings diverging our ideas once again and holding several discussions to choose the design we wanted to develop. Our final design idea was a waste management device that utilizes mushroom spores that biodegrade trash.
The next step was to establish the form, scale, and interfaces of our design. We created a Requirements Table that outlined several requirements of all our customers that our product would need to meet with a focus on the Function, Character, and Interaction of the design. The Requirements Table included needs of the 3 main stakeholders affected by this product: Park workers, Park users, and the ecosystem where the product is used.
To further assist the development of design details, we created a broad interaction map and journey map, created sketch models of the product interface, and connected back to our customer personas.
© clairehashizume.com. All Rights Reserved. Designed by HTML Codex