Difference between revisions of "IS480 Team wiki: 2016T2 ProgneSIS User Testing 4"
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
* Existing VersaFleet users | * Existing VersaFleet users | ||
− | ==<div style="background: #7f7f7f; padding: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 0.3em; text-indent: 15px;letter-spacing:-0.08em;font-size:20px"><font color=#fbfcfd face="Century Gothic">User Testing | + | ==<div style="background: #7f7f7f; padding: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 0.3em; text-indent: 15px;letter-spacing:-0.08em;font-size:20px"><font color=#fbfcfd face="Century Gothic">User Testing 4 Tasks</font></div>== |
User Testing 4 task forms were given to the participants. These user testing tasks were designed to find out if users are able to navigate from one page to another and identify the information required to find out if user interface is user-friendly and information display is clear. After the user testing, users were handed Post User Testing 4 Questionnaires to help us reaffirm the applicability of our application to logistics companies and identify areas of improvements that our clients could look out for after the handover. | User Testing 4 task forms were given to the participants. These user testing tasks were designed to find out if users are able to navigate from one page to another and identify the information required to find out if user interface is user-friendly and information display is clear. After the user testing, users were handed Post User Testing 4 Questionnaires to help us reaffirm the applicability of our application to logistics companies and identify areas of improvements that our clients could look out for after the handover. | ||
*[[Media: Team_ProgneSIS_User_Testing_4_Form.pdf| User Testing 4 Tasks]]<br> | *[[Media: Team_ProgneSIS_User_Testing_4_Form.pdf| User Testing 4 Tasks]]<br> |
Revision as of 17:20, 10 April 2016
Technical Documents | Design Documents | Test Documents | Meetings Minutes | Project Deliverables |
Contents
|
Study Goal | Results | Goal Achieved/Not |
---|---|---|
1. Users should find it easy to understand dashboard | Expected average time taken was 10 secs for task 1 while the actual average time taken for task 1 is 4.63s. | Goal Achieved |
2. Users should find it easy to navigate through the application | Expected average time taken was 60 secs for task 2 and task 3 while the actual average time taken for task 2 and task 3 is 22.13s. | Goal Achieved |
3. Users should complete all tasks without guidance from facilitator | Expected average of total time taken to fill up all tasks is 70secs while the actual average of total time taken for all tasks is 27.25s. Expected average rating of user-friendliness is 6 while the actual rating is 6.75. |
Goal Achieved |
4. Users should find the system useful | Expected average rating of applicability is 6 while the actual rating is 6.75. Expected average rating of likelihood to use is 6 while the actual rating is 6.88. |
Goal Achieved |
Average Time taken to complete task 1 (in seconds) | Standard Deviation of Time taken to complete task 1 (in seconds) | Median of Time taken to complete task 1 (in seconds) | Expected Amount of Time taken to complete task 1 (in seconds) |
---|---|---|---|
4.63 | 0.74 | 4.5 | 10 |
Average Time taken to complete task 2 & 3 (in seconds) | Standard Deviation of Time taken to complete task 2 & 3 (in seconds) | Median of Time taken to complete task 2 & 3(in seconds) | Expected Amount of Time taken to complete task 2 & 3 (in seconds) |
---|---|---|---|
22.13 | 1.73 | 21.5 | 60 |
Average Time taken to complete all task (in seconds) | Standard Deviation of Time taken to complete all tasks (in seconds) | Median of Time taken to complete all tasks (in seconds) | Expected Amount of Time taken to complete all tasks (in seconds) |
---|---|---|---|
27.25 | 1.75 | 27.5 | 70 |
Total No. of Navigation Errors | Average No. of Navigation Errors | Standard Deviation of Navigation Errors | Median of Navigation Errors | Expected No. of Navigation Errors |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Average User-friendliness Rating | Expected User-friendliness Rating |
---|---|
6.75 | 6 |
Average Ease of Navigation Rating | Expected Ease of Navigation Rating |
---|---|
6.88 | 6 |
Average Applicability Rating | Expected Applicability Rating |
---|---|
6.75 | 6 |
Average Likelihood to Use Rating | Expected of Likelihood to Use Rating |
---|---|
6.88 | 6 |
Feedback/Comments |
---|
Much clearer overview of company's operational performance |
Simple and easily understandable user interface |
Definitely helps save time from calculation and more productive work can be done |
Increased accuracy and reliability of delivery performance |
Helps us in investigating possible causes of poor delivery |
Could include vehicle utilisation information |