Elizabeth Weiser Caswell Diabetes Institute

University of Michigan

Jan 2023 – Apr 2023

Our Client

The CDI (Caswell Diabetes Institute) website showcases the Elizabeth Weiser Caswell Diabetes Institute's mission to enhance diabetes care, research, and education.

It highlights their commitment to transformative, integrated care, collaborative research, and leadership in the field of diabetes and metabolic diseases.

Project Goal

This project seeks to harness the information of the core services available to CDI members and better connect them to the research, trainee, and learner audience of then CDI members.

Key Questions

  1. What resources and information does the client already have for this project?

  2. How can we use these resources to meet the expectations of this project?

  3. What do users hope to acomplish through the usage of this website?

Impact

Made design recommendations that can provide a better experience after each research stage based on research findings

The Team

4 UX Researchers

Research Timeline

 
 
 

Background Research

Secondary research

Conducted secondary research on the subject better to have a better understanding of the user group for the CDI website

Client meeting

Met with the client to review their previous research efforts, aiming to avoid redundancy and identify any areas that may have been overlooked in the past

Interaction Mapping

Created a large interaction map to better understand user journeys and identify any critical pain points

A section of the interaction map

User Interview Findings

  • Information is buried and difficult for users to navigate

  • The website lacks information that could be helpful to users, such as information about CDI itself, links to faculties personal websites

  • No effective way for users to provide feedback or report issues on the website

  • Limited promotion methods

  • Poor user interface design

  • Inefficient and costly process to make changes to website

User Interview

Recruitment - To recruit interview participants, we connected with the CDI and compiled a list of potential participants who had interacted with the website at various experience levels. We reached out to all individuals on the list and conducted interviews with those who responded and agreed to participate.

Overview - The interview questions were open-ended and designed to elicit detailed feedback about the website's usability, functionality, and overall user experience.

Surveys - After collecting a significant amount of qualitative data, we created a survey instruction to quantify the data and better understand users. We developed a set of surveys to identify users’ needs and their current struggles using the CDI website which can be conducted for more quantitative data.

Personas Developed

 

Comparative Evaluation Findings

  • Users can’t easily find the search bar on CDI website

  • Lacks responsive design on different devices

  • Users struggle to find information

  • CDI website fails to collect user feedback to improve experience

  • Text heavy and lacks relevant images to help users navigate through contents

Comparative Evaluation

  • Compare competitors’ website functionalities

  • 10 competitors

  • 5 types of competitors

    • Direct, indirect, partial, analogous, parallel

  • Comparative matrix as the analytical tool

    • 3-level nominal scale

 

Heuristic Evaluation Findings

  • Searching for information is difficult

  • Forced link opening

  • Confusing navigation that causes information burial

  • Design is not intuitive

Heuristic Evaluation

Heuristic evaluation using Nielsen’s 10 usability heuristics

4 evaluators conducted individually, then combined our results

Usability Testing Findings

  • Misleading categorization causes users to give up before finding what they are looking for

  • Information is not prioritized which presented challenges for users

  • Similar features are placed under different tabs increasing cognitive load

  • Confusing sub menu & navigation causes severe information burial

  • Inadequate search feature and search result page is not user friendly

Usability Testing

  • Participants

    • 4 participants who were less familar with the website to gain valuable insights

    • None are usability professionals

  • Task-based study with 5 tasks

  • Technical Plan

    • Remote testing via Zoom

  • Pilot test

    • Refining tasks and instructions

  • Data logging forms

    • Debriefing and data analysis

  • Pre- and post- questionnaires for satisfaction assessment

Limitations & Reflections

Sample size limitation - Less diverse participant pool

Heuristic bias - individual bias in heuristic evaluation

Limited design alternatives - didn’t explore a wider range of design alternatives

Lessons Learned

Things don’t always go as planned - Be flexible and responsive, have plan B ready or quickly come up with an alternative solution

Communication is key - Update stakeholders, don’t assume people just know stuff, avoid surprises