As before, the spreadsheet got way to big to do anything like take a screenshot, so here’s a link.
Also, like before, these things are a big pain to do, and annoyingly useful. Running users through the system very early on is really just another form of collaborative design, since suggestions can be rapidly incorporated in the paper design as long as they don’t break the “architecture”. I was able to change some link names and get much better comprehension on the part of the users.
Though more interestingly for me, (and what often seems to happen with loosely structured interviews) is how themes start to emerge by watching the user perform their tasks and then asking questions about that. In this case, the website is for a dues-paying club. In the era of Big Data, why would you need that? The answer that emerged though these and the previous interviews is that a club website has the opportunity to organize and present information in a way that is unique.
A club has a high degree of trust. As such, the users in the test were comfortable with entering information (credentials, etc) that they would not feel comfortable entering for a commercial site. As such the club is able to take their information, federate it with data that is available from other sources and provide that information (in this case) in a bike-club-centric. The participants in this study found the idea of having this level of integration almost magical, and thought that it easily increased the value of belonging to the club.
Based on these interactions, the design of the revamped BBC website should be considerably more valuable to the members (and potential members) of the Baltimore cycling community. It remains to be seen if this will have any affect of the age demographic of the club, but it will certainly have up visible and active in the right places, and providing a strong incentive for membership.