Client Requirements

The search system migration was planned by the enterprise during FY14 and they requested the EA UXM team to conduct market research and define the future state UX requirements.

Solution

• Defined the Enterprise Search strategy by validating the existing solution and the market trends to arrive at the future state principles. Integrated, Instant results, Dynamic Navigation, App search, Personalization, Actionable results, Knowledge Graph, Tools, Mobile Enablement, Error Prevention, Scope of Search, UX Metrics.
• Each of the future state principle was accompanied by a detail design concept of what it will translate to on the surface based on the user search.
• Once the principles were defined and the designs were created, the EA UX team conducted multiple workshops with various LOB’s and conducted surveys to make a decision on the priority listing of the features for quarterly FY roll-out.
• Once the design was deployed the beta version of the new enterprise search was tested across the geographies in both high-bandwidth and low bandwidth countries before it was rolled-out across the enterprise.
• MarkLogic was used as the backend and the front end was designed on bootstrap framework.

Client Requirements

The business stakeholders need was at streamlining, integrating and targeting high quality service platform. Current GSD services are offered through multiple websites and platforms including the existing eServices platform.

Solution

Started this roadmap engagement by defining the goals:

• Make general services available and traceable in one place
• Ensure seamless user experience between multiple platforms
• Rationalize systems that fulfill services

I conducted workshops with the impacted user groups: Staff, service providers, vendors and support team. Once the gaps and future state requirements were defined we took up card sorting activities to group the services in the most logical groups using OptimalSort. The Card sorting was conducted with actual users ranging from novice to expert level to arrive at the grouping.

As the design team lead I defined the user experience strategy for the future state for the two key user groups(user, service provider). On the high-level the key strategic set for users included: one stop shop, self service, Contextual help, bundled services, order tracking and omni-channel.

For service providers: building knowledge repository, promotion of service, service syndication, transparency in servicing, integration of analytics. Service bot concept was proposed as a virtual assistant option.

My approach to usability testing has evolved over time and based on the Institution/Enterprise users I am engaging with I define a framework for validation of the design.

• Step 1: “Mapping human needs”. It is good to first have a detailed understanding of the Institutions mission and vision in terms of their user needs (human need), the institutions short-term and long-term goals. Once these are documented I approach the next phase by mapping it to the UX principles that are relevant in order to meet these needs.
• Step 2: “Testing methodology”. Meet the stakeholder of the application (to be tested). Provide them an overview of the approach to conduct test(in-person/remote) and explain the outcome that will be usually derived. Discuss the infrastructure requirements to conduct testing. Walk the stakeholder through the set of UX principles that were documented during the previous phase and its application during the testing of the current application under discussion. Understand from the stakeholder if they would like any additional areas addressed.
• Step 3: “Application context and moderators guide”. Get an understanding of the purpose of the application and where it maps under the overall IT/Non-IT space. Document all the key scenarios from which we will create the moderators guide along with the measurement criteria.
• Step 4: “Selecting the end users”. Work with the stakeholder to define the user groups to be tested. Get an average of 3 to 5 users per user group. Once the list has been identified create a template for the usability test session context and followed by an invite to the session.
• Step 5: “Conduct the usability testing”. Conduct the usability test session, record the sessions with user permission and document the findings.
• Step 6: “Stakeholder walkthrough”. Give the application stakeholder a walkthrough of the findings and high-level recommendation. If this is a new product roll-out have the training/learning team and the organizational change management team in the walkthrough session. This helps build better learning and training material.

Client Requirements

This assignment was to design a user-centric, personalized and customized Intranet space that tailors content to users’ behavior, increases content relevance, and reduces clutter.

Solution

• Conducted multiple UX and JAD sessions to define the building blocks of the future state enterprise intranet
• Designed the application as per the requirements discovered during the UX and JAD sessions
• Conducted formative rounds of usability testing with the end users across various demographics

The revised design has been designed with a pilot launch and has the following capabilities:

• A social intranet where you can access corporate content and business applications
• Integrates social capabilities—like, share, comment, subscribe and tag to content
• Customized based on your organizational role—the more you use it, the more your content evolves

Client Requirements

This assignment was to conduct user research and define requirements and design architecture for a agronomic advisory application.

Solution

• Met growers and agronomic advisors across Nebraska to understand their pain-points and requirements.
• Created a holistic agronomic advisory tool integrated to the maps which gave a satellite imagery of the fields that belonged to the grower and the current status of each of his fields.
• The time and user management that was proposed as a part of the solution was the highlight of the value-add in this solution proposed.

Back in 2012/13 I worked on the requirements elicitation and design of end to end experience of the dealer from the pre-sales stage, sales and post-sale(servicing) stage for one of the largest automobile company.

phase 1: Defined the experience of the dealer pre-sales and sales product with the experience to be ubiquitous across different channels. There are 2 products that are used during this phase.

• Product 1 - Dealer app: Allows the salesperson to pull up the product catalogue anytime, anywhere. The design of the dealer app was native to iPad and website (enhancement) for desktop. The app allowed the dealer/salesperson to market or sell cars while on the move and away from the dealership. The iPad app provided the potential buyer a virtual tour of the car, with an ability to switch engine variants, colors(interior/exterior) and features. It also provided the inventory info on the app to the dealer/salesman which allowed them to inform the buyer on how soon the choice of can will be available. If the potential buyer was interested in making a purchase and wanted to know more on what can be waived further on the price the dealer can switch to product 2 that gave them the available incentives on the specific make and model.
• Product 2 - Incentive system: This site provided the dealer/seller the ability to see the available incentives on the specific make and model or any generic incentives/cash back certificates/0% interest financing available to the dealers or buyers. The incentives were a combination of the specific dealership rating/performance, the make/model market share, repeat customer loyalty points to name a few.

Phase 2: Parts order system that allowed dealership to OME car parts/accessories that helped with the after sales service of the car. Dealership would have the ability to place order for parts/accessories, get both a delivery estimation and pricing, track shipment status of orders.

Client Requirements

The Bank had about 10 system profiles per user that proved both costly to maintain and hard to migrate/retire. With the objectives of unifying/rationalizing the numerous profiles pages with their source of data, and to reach the consensus on a solution that would work for all stakeholders across the 3 Institutions under the Bank’s umbrella.

Solution

As a part of the Enterprise Architecture (EA) UX team I co-conducted a design studio:

• To define a common profile for the Bank’s Staff referred as “Universal Employee Profile (UEP)” that is agnostic of people, processes and systems.​
• To recommend the best approach to implement the UEP within the Bank.

Design Studio Output: The outcome: It is recommended for the organization to maintain a single profile per user. The profile can contain both skill and social activity related content. We should be able to leverage informal, or strategic, knowledge by building up profiles of Staff that include endorsed knowledge/skill maps enabling expert identification.

• Defined the Universal Employee Profile (UEP) along with the attributes grouped under distinct categories​
• Determined the access levels at the attribute level (Public, Private, Limited)​
• Identification & Validation of the consumers of the unified profile​
• Determination & Rationalization of the data sources for the attributes in UEP​