*Towards Agility and Speed in Enriched UX Evaluation Projects DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89762*

**Case**

**90**

**Objective**

**Objective**

 **Level of**

**Experimental**

 **design**

**Maturity**

**Measures\***

**Time spent**

 **Level of**

**Number of**

**Sample**

 **Testing**

**Magnitude**

**time**

**of the** **report**

**difficulty**

**participants**

**(1**

**—easy**

**to 5**

**—**

**difficult)**

**of the** **stimuli**

**difficulty**

**(condition**

 **= version**

**(1**

**—easy**

**of the product)**

> **to 5**

**—**

**(task =** 

**assignment)**

**(prototype**

**or final** **product)**

**difficult)**

8

 Evaluate

2.5

6 tasks

A&Cl

7 days of preparation

2.5

Millennial

1

*Human 4.0 - From Biology to Cybernetic*

presentation

56-page

report

–

&

Baby

boomer –

3 days of data collection

(testing)

2 days of analysis

*E*

A (EDA)

KPI

PI (SUS) \*

PI (SAM)

N&I

1 interview

2 surveys

different age groups' user

training and

change

management

interaction with

a web site

9

 Evaluate

3.5

 2 conditions

A&Cl

7 days of preparation

3

Millennial

1

presentation

54-page

report

–

3 days of data collection

(testing)

2 days of analysis

*E*

A (EDA)

KPI

PI (Wq)

N&I

5 tasks per condition

1 interview

1 survey

different age groups' user

training and

change

management

interaction with

a web site,

version 2.

10

 Analysis of user

2.5

1 task

A&Cl

7 days of preparation

2

Millennial

30 minutes

 1 presentation

49-page

report

–

3 days of data collection

(testing)

2 days of analysis

*E*

A (EDA)

KPI

PI (SUS); PI

(Wq) & PI

(Att)

N&I

1 interview

3 surveys

experience while

opening an

account on a

smart phone

mobile app

 in

 in

**Execution**

**Details of the testing**

**Results**


of Sprint projects*.* It is not said that they are not feasible in a short period of time, but the data that can be collected and the degree of analysis that can be achieved are more resource intensive. It is, therefore, important to explicitly communicate these limitations to the clients during the initial stages of development of the project, in order to limit the frustrations that they may generate. It is also important to note that this type of project cannot be applied in the fundamental research framework, although it relies on the results of this research to improve their structure. In other words, the co-researchers aim to propose project management structures that

Communication and coordination between different stakeholders of the project are key factors to the smooth functioning of the process. Communication is carried out by daily calls, and sometimes through meetings with the design clients or within the research team itself. The research team also invites various clients to attend the data collection to ensure that there is a common understanding of each step of the UX process. The quality of communication between the clients mainly influences the joint construction of the mandate and the experimental design. This step is vital for clarifying everyone's expectations as well as the potential results of the experiment.

*"For example, in the 7th case study, three different clients were involved in the project. Consequently, our research team had to coordinate with all the clients to ensure that the understanding and expectations of the project were the same for everyone. In the final days leading up to the pre-tests, conference calls lasting from one to two hours with all the stakeholders were organized." (Project Manager)*

The anticipation of measurements and results is also at the center of the agile/ UX process developed by the research team. In parallel with the definition of the mandate and the division into use scenarios, the research team continually tries to foresee the structure of the presentation of the results while being flexible. Empirical data, both implicit (lived experience assessed with psychophysiological measures) and explicit (perceived experience assessed with self-reported questionnaire and interview), are considered. This anticipation is carried out using a systematic methodology of foreseen codification of the psychophysiological—emotional and cognitive—measures within the clarification of the mandate and the experimental design. The triangulation of measures also makes it possible to anticipate the potentially interesting results that will answer the client's questions. This triangulation is achieved through a mosaic of proven collection methods [5, 30, 31]. The use of several data collection technologies of variable nature (physiological, psychological, and behavioral) ensures an enriched data collection. Consequently, this anticipatory effort allows the UX team to be one development cycle ahead of others and to accelerate the whole process of analyzing the collected data. Comparative empirical data methodology is also deployed. By comparing different conditions of use, design elements, or even groups of users, decision-making becomes more objective,

*"For example, in the 7th case study, the project involved the collection of implicit data from eye tracking (Tobii), recognition of facial expressions (Facereader,*

reflect the current industry needs.

**4.2 Based on the nature of elements**

*4.2.1 Human: communication and coordination*

*Towards Agility and Speed in Enriched UX Evaluation Projects*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89762*

*4.2.2 Technical: hybrid data collection method*

concrete, and easy for the team of designers.

**93**

#### **Table 2.**

*Statistics for the totality of the Sprint projects and mean per project.*

4.The time constrains: (a) need to adjust the granularity (level of details) of the project according to the research question; (b) need to introduce pre-tests to provide last-minute adjustments on site; (c) need to carefully evaluate the time allotted for the project; and, thus, (d) need for scheduling.

These strategies are focused on meeting the clients' expectations of time, budget, and UX issues.

#### **4.1 Based on the nature of the research**

#### *4.1.1 Research question type*

Every UX research begins with a question. The nature of this issue has a direct impact not only on the completion of the UX tests but also on the complexity of the tests. This complexity depends on the nature of the stimuli studied and on the level of authenticity of the desired context of use. Indeed, the research question determines the nature of the stimuli, that is, whether they are static or dynamic. For example, studying the navigation of a Website on a computer screen underlies the deployment of static stimuli which, *a priori*, is easy data to analyze. Static stimuli require shorter coding and analysis time than dynamic stimuli, for example, the study of a game application on mobile. The same applies to the choice of data collection tools deployed. Coding and analyzing data from an eye tracker does not represent the same workload as coding and analyzing data from an electroencephalography (EEG) headset.

Moreover, the research question directly influences the choice of the context of use in which the experiment takes place and the importance of the level of authenticity to be respected. Inevitably, undertaking an experiment in a real-life context does not underlie the allocation and deployment of the same resources (material and human) and the same time space for its realization in a laboratory context. Dynamic stimuli and the context of authentic use are the most important limitations
