HeaderSIS.jpg

IS480 Team wiki: 2012T1 One-hit Wonder Final Wiki Usability Study

From IS480
Revision as of 08:07, 29 November 2012 by Kaili.tee.2009 (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

HomeOHW.png Home

Project Progress

Project Management

Project Quality

Usability Study

Reflection

Slides and Poster

Usability Study: User Testing 2

Usability Study Recap

Usability Study Recap

HEURISTIC EVALUATION

In order to find out the usability of Flauntpage, we conducted a Heuristic Evaluation.

This HE focuses mainly on 8 Usability Heuristics focus points as follows:

  1. Be consistent
  2. Focus on tasks
  3. Provide feedback
  4. Follow established conventions
  5. Speak the user’s language
  6. Prevent errors
  7. Minimize clicks
  8. Avoid scrolling

Refer to detailed analysis of Heuristic Evaluation here


USER TESTING 1

Our first User Testing was conducted to gather more in-depth insights on the usability of FlauntPage and to ensure that the deployed version is running smoothly.

We also gathered many valuable feedbacks on how we could improve the workflow due to varying human behavior and other user interface improvements


Refer to detailed analysis of UT1 here


Difference between UT1 & UT2

UT1 UT2
Objectives To ensure that FlauntPage is performing well on the server with no major bugs and errors caught in the process. To find out the effectiveness of FlauntPage and how convenient it is for users to create employment documents using our application as compared to other tools like Microsoft Word.

To find out the effectiveness and value of FlauntPage and how convenient it is for companies to find suitable candidates as compared to other channels (e.g Other job portals, newspaper, company website etc)

Execution Guided.

Users assigned a role and given detailed test cases with guided steps to follow. Users rated difficulty and gave comments for each task completed.

Unguided.

Part I: Users assigned a role and given a resume template to create a replica of the resume using Microsoft words and FlauntPage. Timings will taken for creation of documents and we later observed users behavior when using FlauntPage.
Part II: A new group of testers to measure the quality of the resumes created by Part I's users.

UT2 Objective

UT2 Objective

Execution Period: 5th November 2012 - 7th November 2012 (3 days)


Job Seeker:

To find out the effectiveness of FlauntPage and how convenient it is for users to create employment documents using our application as compared to other tools like Microsoft Word.

Job Seeker
Total no. of testers 16

M.png M.png M.png M.png M.png M.png M.png M.png
F.png F.png F.png F.png F.png F.png F.png F.png

Browser used Google Chrome & Firefox
Age range 18 - 30
No. of testers assigned difficult level 10
No. of testers assigned easy level 6


Company:

To find out the effectiveness and value of FlauntPage and how convenient it is for companies to find suitable candidates as compared to other channels (e.g Other job portals, newspaper, company website etc)

Company
Total no. of testers 2
Browser used Google Chrome
Company name/Tester Richemont Luxury (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Hiring Consultant

Procedure

Procedure

Part 1:

  1. Tester will be assigned to complete a resume using either the easy or difficult version of the sample resume information
  2. Create a resume using Microsoft Word (Activity timed)
  3. Testers are required to format the layout and imagine that they are sending this resume out to apply for a job
  4. Login to dev.flauntpage.com and create a resume using the same piece of information provided (Activity timed)
  5. Team will record the time taken in completing the resume for both the MS Word and Flauntpage version.
  6. Navigate around the application – Flauntpage freely to try out other functionalities
  7. Answer a few questions on their general feelings of our application – FlauntPage


Download sample of easy template here
Download sample of difficult template here
Download sample of user overall experience feedback here


Part 2:

  • With all the resumes collected from the previous testers, we will get another group of testers to measure the quality of the resume.
  • Testers were given 16 sets of resumes (consist of both MS Word & FlauntPage version, randomized) and tasked to rate each resume between the scale of 1 to 5 (1 being the lowest)

Results & Analysis

Results & Analysis
  1. Based on the feedbacks provided by the testers in Part 1 of the testing, team identified the major feedbacks and implemented the changes
  2. With the ratings provided by the testers in Part 2, team ploted a graph (time vs quality) to identify the correlation between MS Word and FlauntPage

Improvements

Improvements

Instant Resume Template (Finalized Layout):

Resume1.jpg Resume2.jpg


Cover Letter Template (Finalized Layout):

Coverletter1.jpg