Meet Meetings with a purpose.

Meet: The Team Derin D. Dartis W. Lorena H.L. Peter W. Engineering UX/UI PM Engineering

Tasks 1) Schedule a Meeting (Complex) Implemented before quarter. 2) Respond and Manage Meetings (Moderate) Implemented before quarter. 1) View Historical Meeting Data (Simple)

Prototype Change Replace hardcoded historical meeting data with actual data.

Methodology

User 1: Camilo Product Manager at Facebook Tested in dorm room Age: 23

User 2: Vanessa Undergraduate (Public Policy) Tested in dorm room Age: 21

User 3: Frank Graduate Student (ECE) Tested in dorm room Age: 26

User 4: John Professor of Computer Science Tested in his office Age: 61

Equipment Used Prototype was deployed on an iPhone 6 POV of tests recorded with smartphone camera iOS Video Logging with Quicktime Player

What We Looked For (Process Data) TASK 1: SCHEDULE MEETINGS o Can the user figure out navigating through the screens? o Are any of the input methods too complicated?

What We Looked For (Process Data) TASK 2: RESPOND TO MEETING REQUESTS o Can the user easily find the invitation requests? o Does the user know how to deal with the talking points?

What We Looked For (Process Data) TASK 3: VIEW HISTORICAL MEETING DATA o Can the user quickly understand the historical data? o Can the user navigate through the charts of various time granularities?

Procedure 1)Sign consent form in quiet room 2)Described the basic idea of Meet as well as the 3 tasks we are testing for. Users were then asked to perform the 3 tasks (without details about the specifics of the tasks). 1)While participant interacted with device, we recorded using both screen logger and an external camera (POV) 1)Compensation: BROWNIES

Test Measures (Bottom- Line Data) 1) NUMBER OF ERRORS / TASK 2) TIME TO COMPLETE EACH TASK Both measures tell us how intuitive the tasks are for a first-time user.

Results

Number of Errors ParticipantHard TaskMedium TaskEasy Task n/a Mean

Time to Complete (s) ParticipantHard TaskMedium TaskEasy Task n/a Mean

Create Meeting: Major Observations Initially had trouble figuring out how to navigate through screens (4/4) Pressing “back” took user to dashboard rather than actually going back (3/4) There were so many time options present that the user took longer to choose a time (3/4)

Create Meeting: Major Observations very confusing navigation – hard to find and swiping back exits the “funnel” user loses data when leaving page

Respond to Meeting: Major Observations Needed prompting to discover the meetings to respond to (1/3) Users were able to accept all of the meetings once “funneled” into the meeting response sequence (3/3)

Meeting Analytics: Major Observations Had trouble discovering the tabs for viewing different time granularities (3/3). One user did not ever discover the tabs Clear confusion about what the statistics on the analytics chart even meant (1/3) Users quickly identified the analytics screen (3/3)

Meeting Analytics: Major Observations changing chart granularity is difficult to see confusion about what the chart is actually showing

Discussion

For a Larger Study… Instead of telling the users to execute a broad task, we should give them more guided instructions. o e.g. “Create a new meeting on Sunday, inviting exactly 3 people, with 2 talking points, and…” This will provide more concrete bottom-line data.

On the Interface Side of Things… App cannot crash during study! o Perform extensive stress-testing of the app before the study. Provide more visual cues to guide the user when creating a meeting or joining a meeting. Provide more visual cues about how the user can interact with the historical data, including clear labels on the graphs.

Summary Conducted an in-lab usability pilot study of Meet. Discovered that there is a bit more implementation that is required of our app, especially in regards to ease of usability of current features (rather than on creating new features).