I’m currently enjoying this book:
Mulder, S., & Yaar, Z. (2007). The user is always right: A practical guide to creating and using personas for the web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Mostly because of the way the authors break down the persona creation process. This landscape of user research chart is a good example of their technique: (pg. 40) 
Part of the reason this is useful is because of its delineation between insight and validation and between what people say and what they do. I think a lot of times groups approach usability from the standpoint of tools, i.e. “we have this survey software, let’s conduct some user research”. This chart highlights the need to decide ahead of time exactly what your goals are for whatever study you’re embarking on.
For example, if your project needs funding, and a validation of what your users are currently putting up with will help highlight that, then a user survey is entirely appropriate. The Montana Memory Project is one such animal, because it’s a software platform in search of sponsorship, but the users are fairly well on board. A survey should go a long way to validate the depth of enthusiasm for the project as well as highlight gaps in service to users across the state.
On the other hand, this chart also points out the fact that surveys cannot satisfy all research needs in this area. For that you need an open-ended format, preferably face to face where “accidents” can happen. A really good example was a study I worked on in the past where I was interviewing a faculty member about to retire. He admitted that he uses library article databases merely to find phone numbers of people researching in his field so he could be sure to keep track of their work. That’s a use case I would never have dreamed of for this project, and probably wouldn’t have come up with in a survey because it was tangential to what we were studying at the time.
Lastly, I like this chart because it points out the breadth, depth, and potential of usability studies. Good stuff.
Post a Comment