Like a squirrel in a wheel or a bit about user research in conditions of limited capabilities

On the Internet you can find a lot of articles on how to properly communicate with users and conduct usability testing.

But, as often happens, they painted on paper and forgot about the ravines. Not everyone and not always have the opportunity, time, money ... we continue to list other reasons for which it is impossible to conduct research. It does not work, but you still need it. Well, no, but it is highly desirable to know your audience on the other side of the screen.
')
And what to do? Shrug, forget and score? The option is so-so, to be honest.
In my piggy bank there were two exponential projects that I did from scratch, conducted research and testing from the series: doing as it will turn out and getting out as we can.

I concluded that it’s better than nothing at all. I want to share the experience of the wrong research from which I squeezed all the juice, getting a partial, but all the same, result.

First experience

Initial data:

• Analytics, which answered the question why we are doing this particular product and why these particular products will be interesting (transportation conditions, complexity of shipment, demand for certain categories of goods, etc.);
• List of competing organizations;
• Understanding who would be on the other side of the screen was, but there is no evil how to lure them to our side;
• Short time;
• Budget deficit.

The added difficulty was that there was a clear division into two categories of users on the same resource: some bought, others sold. Their needs and behavior, respectively, were different, but the entry point was one.

The great advantage was that one part of colleagues already actively used competing resources for buying and selling, the second part could become potential sellers, but competing resources were not suitable for their scale of production.

On the one hand, great luck, when the representatives of your target audience are sitting at your side and only stretch out your hand. On the other hand, they are immersed in the project, just like you. As a bonus, take part in general discussions. And the cherry on the cake is the absence of a secluded corner for confidential conversations. This means that questions and answers are heard by everyone. Intrigue, in fact, zero. Like the purity of the experiment.

What did you do:

• She asked about the sites of competitors, past and present experience of interaction with them: how they chose, what they paid attention to, why they chose this one and not the other. What you like and what not. Requested to describe the stages of buying or selling. It didn’t matter who heard what, because everyone had their own experience. Of course, I tried to ask questions in a quiet voice and, if possible, when there were less people around. Be sure to tell how long the conversation will take. This is important, since colleagues do not have a separate time allocated for you, and to ask “quickly” in such a situation is not an option at all. It is necessary to coordinate everything in advance and adapt;
• Showed a prototype, checking the clarity of buttons, texts, titles. How logical the blocks are, the written texts are clear and the interface is predictable;
• Conducted testing on the main scenarios. I watched and wrote down which moments cause difficulties, where the path went smoothly, and where it caused questions or went not according to plan. I asked, in the course of or at the end, what was not clear or why I decided to roll;
• Showed preliminary sketches of design: estimated the overall impression and mood of the site.

What got:

• Despite the fact that the potential target audience was in the context of the topic, it was possible to catch critical errors, flaws in logic, inaccuracy of texts on the key buttons and add functionality that was not enough;
• To correct the design concept, which has become more consistent with the set goals;
• Also, I pulled a couple of insights. For example: adults do not always choose the product. Cases where a product picks and adds a child to the basket, for example, eight years old, and an adult plays the role of a submissive wallet is not so rare.

Conclusion:

A small number of respondents (in my case there were about eight) are better than nothing at all. Communicating and testing people immersed in a context is better than communicating with yourself and the walls. Take colleagues, friends who are close to the topic at least a little. It may not be correct in its pure form, but it will still help to avoid mistakes more than if you close yourself in your world of pink unicorns and make a product solely on the basis of your fantasies and conjectures.

Second experience

Initial data:

• Outdated designs and sketches of the predecessor;
• Partial analytics, sometimes outdated too;
• Access to the potential user is completely blocked;
• Adequate development time;
• Colleagues who have had some experience with the future user

Tell me right away that the product was made for a fairly narrow audience with a specific type of activity. About the user, besides the occupation, I knew the age range and for what specific tasks the product is made. Also, I knew about one direct competitor and had access to the test functionality of the partner, which had a similar to our system, but was aimed at a wider audience.

What did you do:

• A preliminary top-level functional scheme for a general understanding of the product. Then she broke it into logical parts and distributed it in order of priority. Then she threw the finds, ideas, etc., either on the general functionality, or on specific parts;
• I studied all the possible functionality of a competitor. Since the system was closed and you just couldn’t get into it, you had to search all available sources: the official website, articles, videos on YouTube, user reviews. I wrote out everything that can be useful and useful for use, inspiration, a greater understanding of the user's needs;
• As I worked, I studied the partner’s test system: how they approached the implementation of one or another functional;
• I found another couple of projects that developed certain parts of the functionality similar to ours and dragged several ideas and thoughts into the piggy bank;
• Read forums to a similar audience, for a greater understanding of needs and goals;
• Consulted and asked questions to colleagues who previously had access to the user's body;
• She found a person (one), with the same kind of activity, and spoke with him “for life”, in order to at least a little plunge into the specifics of work, difficulties and nuances of the profession. Understand how they live on the other side of the screen.

What got:

Of course, I can’t say with confidence that I have taken into account everything to make the user’s work with the system as comfortable and efficient as possible, since at the time of my departure the project was not yet launched, but my search works led to the fact that but I took a firm step, albeit mentally, but still closer to the people for whom I was taking it.

From the useful and important, it made a fuller understanding for itself, as we say, “the context of use”. On what task they can devote more time, and where the issue should be solved as short as possible. What is important, what is needed, how convenient. She closed other questions that she wouldn’t have thought of, cooking in the cauldron of her thoughts and experiences of her colleagues.

Conclusion:

he who seeks will find (c). If there is no opportunity to talk directly with the people for whom you are making a product, look for where you can and ask who you will catch. Even communication with the near-target audience is better than no communication at all. Reading review articles, forums and watching videos is more than nothing. The main thing is to properly filter and apply the data.

That's all I wanted to say. I hope it was interesting and useful. If you also had a similar experience - share. It is always interesting to know what we can do to make this world more comfortable.