Table of Contents

Abstract 1

Introduction 2

Ch. 1 – Identifying User Needs and Requirements

Introduction 4
User Scenarios 5
Task Analyses 6
Hierarchical Task Analysis 8
Volere Template 9
Conclusion 14

Ch. 2 – Conceptual modelling and alternative designs

Introduction 16
Design process 16
Conclusion 22

Ch. 3 – Prototypes
Introduction 23
Prototype #1 24
Prototype #2 31
Conclusion 36

Ch. 4 – Design evaluation

Introduction 37
User Profiles 37
Methods 38
Evaluation Criteria 39
Evaluation Plan 41
Results 42
Data Analysis 43
Discussion of Results 46
Conclusion 48

Ch. 5 – Final Design Description 50

Ch. 6 – Reflections 52

Appendix 53
List of Changes 60
References 62
Abstract

For the course of this design project we decided to analyze the current BCIT parking system and

redesign it according to the major issues that emerged while observing and interviewing its users.

From those results, we identified the user needs and requirements and attempted to create

alternative designs to address these problems. After holding brainstorming sessions we developed

two new conceptual designs based on the perspectives of interaction mode and interaction

metaphor—though after reflection, we found that one of the designs was not innovative enough,

being too similar to parking lots that already exist. We replaced this design with an alternate one

and built low-fidelity prototypes to use in the usability testing stage. Using the Wizard-of-Oz

testing paradigm, we evaluated the effectiveness of our designs according to the relevant usability

metrics outlined by Donald Norman. Based on the data we collected and the analysis of these

results, we conceptualized a single final design that incorporated the best aspects of our two

previous systems.

1
Introduction

The purpose of this design project is to develop a new parking payment system for the BCIT

parking lot that would be more straightforward to use for both new visitors and returning users.

Based on feedback we received from current BCIT parking lot patrons, our conclusion is that the

main problem of the BCIT parking system lies in the incongruity between the users’ mental model

of the parking system and the conceptual model of the actual parking lot design. This is because

typical users have expectations of the conceptual model based on other more common pay

parking systems they have used before. Our design aims to address the problems of the current

design but incorporating conventions of existing parking systems that users would be familiar with,

and at the same time localizing and automating the payment process.

We began the design process by pinpointing the exact usability issues that people had

with the current design. This was done by surveying a random sample of BCIT parking lot users

using a questionnaire. The data collected from the user surveys was then collated and analyzed,

and then summarized into lists of design problems and usability goals. From there we drilled

down to the root cause of the problems and made the main problem statement that was to drive

our design process. The typical user tasks performed with the parking system were identified,

which provided information as to the usability requirements of the system. Two typical user

scenarios were established to demonstrate the typical tasks performed by users of the BCIT parking

system.

Having isolated the usability issues of the existing BCIT parking system, we generated

alternative conceptual designs based on the system requirements identified during our problem

investigation. A brain-writing exercise was conducted to generate ideas for the new design. The

individual ideas were then categorized and evaluated based on their innovativeness and

feasibility, and were examined along with the previously isolated system requirements to identify

the key functions for our parking system. Using the information and ideas accumulated through

these processes, we generated two conceptual designs based on the system requirements and key

2
system functions. However, we later had to abandon one of our proposed conceptual designs and

replace it with another that was more innovative.

We selected Wizard-of-Oz usability testing as our preferred paradigm for evaluating the

success or failures of our proposed designs. We established a set of system rules for each

conceptual design based on observable our key system functions and observable user tasks. A

typical use scenario for each conceptual design was devised and storyboarded to elucidate the

possible interactions between the user and the system, as well as illustrate how our conceptual

designs operate. This part of our design process concluded with the construction of two low-

fidelity prototypes using cardboard, duct tape, and paper display screens.

Once our prototypes were completed, a list of usability criteria in the form of usability

metrics was made to benchmark the successes and failures of our two conceptual designs. The

previously established use scenarios were applied to define tasks for the usability evaluation and

analysis. Questionnaires were created based on our usability criteria and use scenarios, which we

administered to our 4 test volunteers after they finished Wizard-of-Oz testing each of our

prototypes. During these tests we also recorded observations by writing notes and recording

audio. The observations we made and the data retrieved from the questionnaires were collated

and analyzed, the results of which were categorized and prioritized as a list of usability issues.

This allowed us to pinpoint the main problems with our conceptual designs, and we tried to

address these problems by suggesting changes to improve their usability. In the end, we decided

to combine the best parts of the two designs into a new conceptual design for the BCIT parking

system.