Discovery

Novice

Task analysis mentioned or shown but it wasn’t clear what insights were gained or how those insights informed the design.

Competent

Task analysis was performed in a deliberate way and demonstrated a sensible level of detail for the project. At least some connections were made between findings from task analysis and design decisions.

Proficient

Multiple tasks have been analyzed, considered and prioritized. Design decisions are thoroughly informed by a clear understanding of users' tasks and existing behaviors and processes.

Expert

Other stakeholders have been incorporated into the process of analyzing users' tasks in order to increase ownership of insights. Findings from task analysis clearly map to relevant planning documents such as user flows or use cases. No doubts remain about which tasks are being performed, what users' motivations are, or how task goals are accomplished.

Novice

Some competitors are identified, but it’s not clear what was learned or applied from this work.

Competent

A good set of competitors and comparison points have been investigated, looking at design approaches, feature sets. Screenshots are included.

Proficient

User flows and heuristics for other products and services have been considered. It is clear how learnings from this research were applied to the design.

Expert

Benchmarking includes a holistic understanding of the market the product would operate in, with clear ideas for business opportunities and differentiation among peers. Those have also been clearly translated into the design.

Novice

Persona appears to be more assumption-based than research-based.

Competent

Persona is clearly research-based, includes relevant information.

Proficient

Persona is super relevant to the project, and feels like a “real” person that we could imagine using the product.

Expert

Primary, secondary and tertiary personas have been considered, all at a proficient level. Personas include information targeted to guiding the project.

Novice

Problem statement is provided but is too vague or too broad. Not framed as a clear problem or opportunity that could be addressed.

Competent

Problem statement is specific, achievable, and clearly connects to the research findings and the solution.

Proficient

Problem statement has been boiled down to its core, so that it almost seems obvious!

Expert

The core problem has been completely baked in and drives the story of the design.

Novice

Conducted less than 6 user interviews.

Competent

Conducted 6–9 user interviews.

Proficient

Conducted 9–12 user interviews.

Expert

Conducted 13+ user interviews.

Novice

Scenario is provided but feels perfunctory or unrealistic.

Competent

Scenario is tied clearly to the persona in a realistic context.

Proficient

Scenario connects the persona to a task which in turn realistically maps to how the user in that scenario would use the prototype.

Expert

Scenarios have been considered with edge cases in mind.

Novice

1-3 criteria met.

Competent

4-6 criteria met.

Proficient

7-8 criteria met.

Expert

Surveys are thoughtfully deployed and targeted, with no doubts about how the surveys informed problem identification and the design solutions.

Novice

Shallow and/or overly biased findings and/or a bit disconnected from the design product.

Competent

Findings that aren’t overly biased and based on behaviours over intentions. Connected to the design decisions.

Proficient

Findings clearly based on behaviour. Connections to the design decisions are made obvious. The audience has no doubts on the goal of the interviews. It’s clear who was interviewed and why.

Expert

Findings are deep and thoroughly connected through the entire process and have been presented in a way that is targeted to the audience.