By Alex Sotiropoulos, Communications Assistant, NS GovLab
Last time we met with the fellows, we discussed themes related to their How Might We (HMW) questions and how it would aid in the design process of prototyping. Teams completed their research synthesis, identified their users challenges, and insights thus far.
The fellows were then sent off to turn their research insights into focused HMWs and create a systems map of observations to illustrate how their findings are interconnected.
The objective of the prototyping session was to develop ideas to address their research identified HMW questions, narrow those ideas to the best 1–3 potential prototype concepts, and select one to prototype (or more if their team wanted to put in the work to test more than one idea).
Step One: Addressing challenges and our lessons learned
From the previous sessions and research, there were two common themes the fellows were facing: deviating from their original ideas and feeling vulnerable when admitting failure.
Through discussion, everyone came together and agreed that most mistakes are miniscule in the big picture and the most important part is learning.
One fellow said, “having a good framework for failure is better than a mediocre plan for success.”
Step Two: Brainstorming
After everyone met as a group, the fellows split into their teams to brainstorm.
They nominated a facilitator to lead the brainstorming to stay organized and to keep the energy going. Through their HMW questions, the groups generated possible solutions to each question.
The solutions to the HMW questions were written on post-it’s and put underneath each question on the wall to stay organized and see that there are many solutions to one problem.
One issue the fellows were facing was timing. Groups often found themselves stuck on one question with limited solutions, while other HMW questions had 10–15 possible solutions.
It was crucial to not to prolong the amount of time at this stage because the groups needed an extended amount of time to prototype.
Step Two: Select the best ideas
After brainstorming, the groups had a long list of ideas under each HMW question that needed to be reduced to 2–3 ideas per group.
Each fellow had two votes to help determine the ideas that were best suited to move forward and prototype. One vote was the idea they thought was most innovative and a second for the idea most likely to succeed.
Once the voting was complete, the groups described, sketched, and stated the expected impact of the chosen ideas. This helped some groups because it helped to clarify what their prototype(s) would look like.
At this stage, fellows found it difficult to narrow their ideas down. Some groups had over 10 ideas per HMW question, making it hard to select just 2 to vote for.
Eventually, the groups became aware that most of the ideas could be clustered together to create one large idea rather than five or six small ideas that were relatively similar.
The 2–3 ideas were then individually evaluated based on how innovative, realistic, and how excited they were about the idea. After evaluating the ideas, the groups chose the best ideas for prototyping.
Step Three: Prototype, prototype, prototype!
This is where the fellows saw their ideas that started on a post-it note come together in a real prototype. The groups could build a physical prototype, create a storyboard, act out a role play, or go digital to create their ideas. The sky was the limit.
It was imperative that the fellows imagine the user experience, create an experience map, and list questions and assumptions that would arise during the testing before moving forward. This stage helped the groups address possible challenges before taking it for testing.
At this stage, the groups were actively thinking about how they wanted to prototype their idea. Some groups used paper, while others created physical objects out of Lego, cardboard, pipe-cleaners, clay, etc.
It should be noted that during this stage, fellows were beginning to come up with secondary prototype ideas, questioning their current prototype, and thinking about coming up with a new idea.
Groups were reminded that a big part of this process is learning what works… and what doesn't. Fellows will want to change, add, or remove aspects as they go. The prototyping stage isn’t being forced to stick to your first idea throughout the whole process, rather it is a small experiment that can be changed or adapted.
The goal of prototyping is not to build the perfect solution, but to build something that can be tested and modified based on the feedback of end users.
Step Four: Testing
Once developing of the prototype was complete, the groups gave feedback on other prototypes and took feedback on theirs.
This stage helped the groups prepare how they want to deliver their pitch when they go out to get feedback on their prototype before they come back for session two.
The most useful information teams were receiving through the this stage was additional information they could add before taking the prototype out for testing.
The fellows engaged seeing other groups prototypes and gaining a new perspective on how others view complex issues they are trying to solve.
Next Steps: Testing the prototypes to gain insight
The teams are to now go out and test their prototypes with potential users before the second session of prototyping. They are reminded to be open to verbal and visual feedback to determine what is and isn't working.
It is important for the teams to keep notes of all feedback as it could assist them with modifications of their current prototype or to bring a new idea to life. With each team having at least one member living in a different area of the province from the rest of their team, these notes will be valuable in making sense of all of the feedback the teams gather during testing.
It is easy to use bias and assume the current prototype will be the one and only, but there will most likely be many changes in the future.
To relate everything the fellows will learn from testing their prototype to our lessons learned at the beginning of the day, one fellow said “the only bad mistake is one you don’t learn from.”
When we meet again in two weeks, the fellows will bring their findings from testing their prototypes. The results may lead them to adapt their current idea or go in a completely different direction in the next session.
Continue to follow along with NS GovLab here and on Twitter (@NSGovLab).
