User Analysis
All interviewees were college undergraduate or graduate students, who socialized in groups of 3 or more people 1-3 times a week. We found that most groups take around 20 minutes decide, but large groups that require a lot of coordination may take up to a day to decide. Below is a table of common personas and their experiences in the group decision-making process.
Persona |
Profile Description |
Concerns |
|---|---|---|
Aaron the Arbitrator |
Aaron is active in the decision making process. He likes to arbitrate, often highlighting people's different preferences and concerns. He often notices that meeker personality types are hesitant to reveal their true preferences because they may conflict with those of more aggressive personality types. He wishes that people would be more open and honest about their true opinions so a fair decision can be made, where everyone's true preferences are weighed equally. |
Having a fair decision-making process that weighs everyone's preferences equally. |
Ian the Indecisive |
Ian doesn't like to make decisions. He does not want to be bear the burden of other people's happiness, so he usually abstains from expressing any opinion in the decision making process. If asked to make a decision, he will take too long, and others will get impatient. He wants someone to make the decision for him, so he doesn't have to bear the burden of group can save time on the decision making process. |
Having a decision maker. |
Nancy the Non-confrontational |
Nancy does not like confrontation. When going out in groups, she often becomes a "push-over" because she dislikes arguing and creating discomfort among her peers, even though she has a very clear sense of what she wants and does not want. She wishes there was a safe-zone to express her true opinions without fear of confrontation or judgment. |
Feeling comfortable expressing her true opinions. |
David the Dominator |
David is an "alpha-male". He knows what he wants and usually gets it through sheer force of his aggressive personality. David usually has an idea of what he wants before the group decision making process and asks other members of the group whether they agree to any of his predetermined preferences. David's main concern is efficiency. He does not like wasting time indulging in indecisiveness. |
Getting what he wants. |
Frank the Fastidious |
Frank has many dietary constraints. He is vegetarian and allergic to dairy. He also doesn't like going to expensive places. Frank usually does not provide suggestions in the decision making process but often ends up. vetoing other people's ideas. |
Choosing a place that satisfies all his constraints. |
Common Trends
- Indecision is a common problem, regardless of the frequency of socializing.
- Different personality types and social realities can prevent everyone from having their preferences taken into account.
- The usual decision process typically involves one person making suggestions and others either agreeing or vetoing
- Problems include nobody making suggestions and the difficulty in accomodating everyone's preferences.
Task Analysis
Express Preferences
Goal: Express one's preferences for restaurants he/she either enjoys or would prefer to avoid.
Subtasks:
- Articulate preferred restaurants or types of food
- Articulate disliked restaurants or types of food
Preconditions:
- User has a general idea of what restaurants and/or types of food he/she likes and/or dislikes.
Time Constraints: User should be able to quickly (no more than a few minutes) put together a small set of preferences. Putting together a more elaborate set of preferences could be done at the user's leisure, but should not take more than 10-20 minutes if the user already has an idea of what he/she likes.
Frequency: When socializing: about once a week. User can save preferences to reduce the frequency of this task.
Offer Options
Goal: Produce a small set of options that the group can use as a starting point for arriving at a decision.
Subtasks:
- Make a suggestion for a specific restaurant.
- Get a list of automatically-generated suggestions.
Preconditions:
- User has already entered general preferences for preferred/disliked restaurants and/or types of food.
- User is with a group of people who have agreed to dine together and would like to decide where.
- (Optional) User has a specific idea for a restaurant he/she would like to go to.
Time Constraints: Quickly --- ideally no more than 1-2 minutes.
Frequency: Once when socializing, about once a week.
Make Decision
Goal: Agree on one specific restaurant at which to dine.
Subtasks:
- Accept or vote for a particular suggestion.
- Reject or express disfavor for a particular suggestion.
- Make final decision based on equal weighting of everyone's expressed preferences and rejections.
Preconditions:
- User has already entered general preferences for preferred/disliked restaurants and/or types of food.
- User is with a group of people who have agreed to dine together and would like to decide where.
- Group has been presented with suggestions for a restaurant and would like to agree on a single choice.
Time Constraints: Quickly, ideally no more than 2 minutes.
Frequency: Once when socializing --- about once a week.
1 Comment
Unknown User (juhokim@mit.edu)
Problem Statement
A very practical problem, but a danger is that a solution might be something that's too obvious. The challenge is how you find a specific task that can differentiate the project from others. Some directions we discussed during the meeting sound promising.
User Analysis
The use of persona was a brilliant choice. The common trends section is a nice way to summarize the findings from your interviews. This exercise will help you refine your idea with a narrower scope.
Task Analysis
The breakdown is reasonable but always keep in mind how users will use the app in real-life situations. Are your tasks socially appropriate? Do the interactions you plan to provide blend in with the observations you made in the user interviews? Also, I wish the analysis went deeper down to reveal unique task characteristics.