Thursday 30th episode 6: We have a prototype to present

Sticky Tabs Consolidation – Another lovely start to the day many many more sticky tabs to review in yet another iteration for improvements. As well as many of the functional and cosmetic changes, the biggest area of feedback could all be resolved by showing the prototype in context. The prototype starts at the point the user has identified a building with Planning permissions. Therefore any time it’s shown we need to be emphasising the input points to this process i.e. walking past a site and pointing a smartphone, a link from the Local Authority website, a link from council correspondence, possibly a scanned QR code (don’t shoot me for this) or even a display in a high footfall area such as a library, school, hospitals supermarkets etc.

Changing my Focus to Project X (temporarily). The design team were on a roll with the changes so I had a chance to catch up with the Planning Policy Manager at Southwark as they’re really trying to progress the digital programme for Planning with their Project X. They’ve done an awful lot of document digitalisation and have all the buildings in the borough 3d imaged. Any larger developments submitted to Southwark must now comply with their new digital 3d standard and the 3d components need to be available as part of the Planning process. In fact the developments are reviewed in Augmented reality in the Southwark Planning Committee meetings, heads sets and all, so it’s essential!

Are the prototypes coming up to scratch? As we know coming into this sprint process there’s a huge amount of work already done in this area. However, it’s been completely at different levels across the board and quite different depending on which back end Planning supplier has been involved. Also as we know the pace has been very slow and the Planning Portal doesn’t appear to have taken these popular requirements into consideration or at least delivered them yet. The sprint teams have now been questioning their work and comparing against the work previously done separately in Camden and Southwark. The conclusion is there’s a major overlap on the submission prototype. The plan is for them to now take the next step forward based on their current work.

Back to the testing. The technology was a little rough and ready but enabled us to watch and listen to the tester giving the prototype a runthrough from a different room and take even more notes! Fortunately the second tester had a major overlap with the first but still raising a significant amount questions and good suggestions. The third and finals tester found several more items to which we could note, by this time it was quite noticeable the amount of repeated comments. Surprisingly some comments from testers were quite contradictory surprising, but at the end of each testing session we had the opportunity to ask the tester some questions so we could clarify any misunderstandings. The 101 sticky tabs way of working is good but some times the context of the comment was lost hence extra questions.

Trivial naming of each prototype actually caused quite a bit of confusion, we had chosen PAM (Planning Application Mentor), this was a mistake as we originally intended the ‘M’ to be Monitor but in the hustle and bustle of the day we forgot.

PAM unsurprisingly led them to believe the Community Engagement module would guide them through the process, which wasn’t good for the viewing and commenting prototype but excellent for the submission prototype. The other team then liberated the name from us! PAM was supposed to be the avatar for any bots we wanted to use or voice control equivalent of Siri and Alexa but for Planning Applications. If we make it to market with the prototype we’d no doubt only want a single Avatar for the whole system rather than a name for each of the prototypes \ modules. In fact we could have a family of avatars for each council service!

We finished the day a little later than expected but broke the back of the notes consolidation to give us a good start on the prototype in the morning.

Nobody likes to rock the boat. With the focus solely on the prototype some of the team are understandably now questioning the quality and how innovative the prototype actually is, especially when compared to the high standards set for normal work they’d intend to present for business as usual work. Somewhat losing focus of the brief has started demotivating some of the group. Nevermind that what we’ve achieved in a few days is an achievement in itself and even more so by validating the previous work carried out. Where the team have got to now, is much less significant than:
A) The value derived from the analysis of the challenge and
B) The fact that we’ve built a common understanding and impetus around what needs to change.

We’re planning to discuss this tomorrow….

Thursday 30th November – Testing with real users
Goal for the day: Reiterating and testing of the prototypes with real users
Agenda Item
09.30 Continue with wireframes
12.30 Lunch
13:30 Active testing session 1
13:30 – 14:15 Citizen planner (confirmed) – Active tester
14:15-14:30 Group discussion
Aisling to stay in room to watch live stream with core team, Anja to carry out active testing in separate room
14:30 Active testing session 2
14.30 -15:15 Planner (not part of the core team)
15:15 -15:30 Group discussion
Aisling to stay in room to watch live stream with core team, Anja to carry out active testing in separate room
15.30 Active testing session 3
15.30 -16:15 Planner (not part of the core team)
16:15 -16:30 Group discussion
Aisling to stay in room to watch live stream with core team, Anja to carry out active testing in separate room
16.30
Discussion of testing results
Working session with coffee and biscuits
17:15 Thursday session close

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *