1
the discover
We initiated the research trying to gather more info on each theme and its problems, then we moved to identifying the overlapping issues. Based on them we could delimit what we should discover, what would be the goal of the user research. With that in mind we applied the tools: Desk Research, CSD Matrix, Questionnaire and Interview.
Desk Research e CSD Matrix
After a doing some desk research and setting the CSD matrix, we grouped all the info to understand better what type of data we had collected and see what would relate to more than one theme simultaneously. Using this parameter we could categorize the infos in 05 groups (listed on the imagem to the right) and identify one that related to all the 03 themes: Data security during commuting.Naturally, it was based on this group that we defined our research goal and applied the questionnaire and interview with users, aiming to collect more quantitative and qualitative data about the topic.
RESEARCH GOAL
Understand the desirability and the knowledge about security technology specific for data protection during people's transit.
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
We started this phase creating hypothesis to guide the questions of the questionnaire, which would, later on, guide the interview script.The first question had the goal of identifying which of the users had an early adopter profile. Knowing that helped us understand the behavior pattern of both audiences (early adopter x not early adopters), by comparing the answers of each profile, and helped us to pre-select the users for the interview. The questions 5, 7, 8 and 10 provided some valuable insights on the types of sensitive data (according to the users: financial data, identification data and personal media), on the most vulnerable moments and a light over the desired solutions. Besides that the answers confirmed we were following the right path by choosing to focus on data security during people's transit, because we validated almost all of our hypothesis, except the one that would lead to innovation in mobility.
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Before conducting the interviews, we filtered out "extreme" users among the questionnaire participants to find insights that could meet the needs of a wider range of people. We compared early adopter profiles to more traditional users, as well as technological profiles to non-technological profiles, and young adults to mature adults.Once again, we generated hypotheses to guide the formulation of the questions, which are listed below:
- 1 - On which devices do you access sensitive data? (smartphone, tablet, laptop...)
- 2 - How does the fear of data leak during your transits in the city impact your routine?
- 3 - How do you currently protect your data? What do you do (or don't do) to keep it more secure?
- 4 - After having your smartphone stolen or lost, what steps do you take regarding your data?
- 5 - How do you search for information about data protection?
- 6 - Do you feel there is a lack of information on how to keep your data safe? If yes, what kind of information?
- 7 - Besides information, what else do you miss to better protect your data? Is there any specific solution / feature you would like?
- 8 - How do you search for information about technological news?
- 9 - Would you pay for a tool to protect your data while you move around the city?
After obtaining the answers, I organized them in a card sorting.
2
DEFINITION
To go deeper into the insights and opportunities that have arisen from the collected data, we used the following tools: Persona, Empathy Map, Job Stories, and How Might We.
PERSONAS AND EMPATHY MAPS
Based on the profile of the interviewed users, we developed a persona with an early adopter profile (our target audience) and another with an opposite profile, in order to identify common points and be able to develop a solution that can serve our target audience well, but is not limited to it.
JOB STORIES AND HOW MIGHT WE
To define which user needs we would address, we created 03 job stories based on our personas. Then, we did a How Might We exercise to select the main opportunity to work on. It was a challenge to choose a single "HMW," and for that, we asked ourselves: Which path leads to a solution that can simultaneously address various problems? By answering this question, we were able to define our focus for the next phase: ideation.
IDEATION GOAL
How can we educate and protect users from data theft/exposure during their everyday use of mobile devices?
3
IDEATION
To open up possibilities in line with our ideation objective, and define the MVP, we applied the following tools: Crazy 8, User Journey, Benchmarking, Feature Brainstorming, and Moscow.
CRAZY 8
We applied the Crazy 8 method and then mapped out the most structured ideia and complementary insights. Eventually we ended up with an app solution of a safe with the support of a web version.
Solution draft:
The solution would be focused on storing sensitive applications of the mobile device on a safe app with a panic button to lock the accesses. The user would be able to activate the panic button remotely by accessing their safe account at the app website from any device. To unlock the safe, it would be necessary to go through a two-factor authentication process, having in hand the temporary password provided on the website (updated every x minutes) and the device where the safe application was installed.
USER JORNEY
While developing the user journey, we finally saw the solution take shape. The user journey was a step that allowed us to better structure the idea, as well as it showed us that we were going in the right direction, proposing something that makes sense for the audience and for the problem to be solved. In addition, it allowed us to identify the most relevant aspects of the solution, by focusing on the impact on the user's life.
BENCHMARKING
Benchmarking was a very enlightening step, as we were able to give direction to our solution by identifying shortcomings in existing similar products. In addition, it helped us to understand how to deliver good usability, adding positive attributes and, mainly, seeking to improve confusing and non-intuitive aspects present in the analysed solutions currently in the market.
BENCHMARKING + Heuristic analyses
Após o benchmarking fizemos um brainstorm de funcionalidades, cujo resultado organizamos por meio de um card sorting e, por fim, aplicamos à um Moscow para definir o nosso MVP.
BRAINSTORMING DE FEATURES
MOSCOW
MVP
4
THE SOLUTION
In this phase we structured the user flow, wireframes, moodboards and prototype.
USER FLOW
The next step was to structure the flow of screens and decision-making during the use of the product. To do this, we defined 3 major flows based on the previously defined goals and tasks:Flow 1: Setting safe.Flow 2: Locking safe.Flow 3: Unlocking safe.
WIREFRAMES
Flow 1: Setting safe.
Flow 2: Safe locking + Flow 3: Safe unlocking
moodboard
We are looking for references of applications that need to communicate security (investment apps, banks, safes...) and we confirm the predominance of blue to convey reliability and the presence of purple to communicate innovation. The present examples of illustration, flow, organizational structure, and buttons were also very useful.
