Prototype building is an important step in the development process, allowing abstract concepts to be transformed into viable solutions. Nevertheless, to achieve successful prototyping, designers must have different theoretical viewpoints that define the implementation for various parties involved and a need to become personified (Chandra Kruse et al., 2021). Adopting specific viewpoints and contemplating contextual elements, designers can shape prototypes that aptly cater to stakeholders’ subtle requirements and anticipations, thus cultivating a more fluid and user-centric grocery shopping encounter.
Defining Perspectives and Their Relation to Aspects
Designers frequently hold different theoretical viewpoints or perspectives on problem-solving regarding the context of prototypes in the realms of product development and design theory. For addressing stakeholders’ prototyping needs, knowing how these perspectives and aspects correlate is important. These perspectives are precision theoretical lenses that provide designers with a step-by-step systematic framework for solving problems (Hess & Summers, 2013). Aspects represent the elements designers consider within a specific perspective, encompassing usability, functionality, aesthetics, user experience, and technical feasibility. Designers who consider all these elements better understand the problems and develop solutions to meet stakeholders’ needs (Pousman & Stasko, 2006). Perspectives offer the overarching framework through which designers define the objectives of the prototype, while aspects serve as the building blocks that contribute to realizing these objectives, ensuring the prototype adequately addresses the diverse needs of stakeholders.
Based on our experience in the Partitect project at Malmö University, where we built a shopping application for cohabitants of Sweden (consumers) that gathered their information, one of our best practices was to approach it from a user perspective. We aimed to improve the application’s functionality and included a stand feature on consumers’ phones when the application is started for them to use whenever they want to note important information. A designer adopting a human-centered design approach may not consider the end user’s preferences and behaviors. An organization-focused perspective prioritizes cost-effectiveness, scalability, and market viability, leading to considerations like business models, revenue streams, or competitive analyses to match the prototype with business goals (Pousman & Stasko, 2006). Different perspectives are selected during the designing process based on their practical effects on outcomes by adjusting the solutions uniquely according to user and business needs.
The Need for Different Perspectives in Prototyping
To ensure that prototyping is effective, the approach should align with the needs of different stakeholders at different levels. Therefore, adopting the perception perspective and realizing the value creation through establishing a personalized information synchronization system is very crucial. Additionally, such reflective disposition-orientation underscores the practical significance of addressing consumer needs through informed design solutions. Our project applied this approach, which mandates a holistic consideration of perspectives, exemplified by our focus on making the app problem-focused and leveraging insights for a well-supported solution in the final presentation. A nuanced strategy like this considers consumers’ needs, team requirements, and overall business sustainability alike, thus illustrating how theoretical concepts can be practically integrated.
Differentiating Designing and Using Moments
Distinguishing between designing and using moments is crucial to make prototyping seamless. Design moments are generated by designing and refining various design concepts combined with stakeholder feedback (Pousman & Stasko, 2006). Moments entails evaluating prototypes tested by actual users (Swedish cohabitants) to validate practicality and obtain constructive feedback. During the developmental phase, designers need to understand designing and using moments to see through user needs or refine prototypes. In the Partitect project, we actively engaged in designing moments, refining our application based on distinct design ideas and stakeholder inputs while concurrently participating in evaluative moments, scrutinizing our application for practicality, and collecting user feedback.
The Importance of Fidelity Perspective in Prototyping
Fidelity is the similarity between a prototype and a finished product, which must be considered during prototyping. High-fidelity prototypes imitate the visual and valuable aspects of the finished product, allowing consumers and stakeholders (users) to see what they believe represents its actual function and design, which allows for accurate comments and feedback consistency. The advantage of high-fidelity prototypes is that they can elicit finer and richer user feedback. When using a prototype virtually identical in form to the final product, users can give their opinions based on practical experience (Pousman & Stasko, 2006). This pinpoints potential usability issues and design flaws and validates layout selections. The earlier acquisition of feedback through high-fidelity prototypes allows designers to make decisions responsibly and iterate on their designs to make the end product more refined, sophisticated, and user-centered. Moreover, high-fidelity prototypes help improve stakeholder communication because they are a concrete visual representation of the finished product’s appearance and function. Such visual clarity helps bring stakeholders’ expectations into line and reduces the chance of misunderstanding in project development.
However, a key consideration is the strategic timing and circumstances when high-fidelity prototypes are introduced. While the prototype may receive positive feedback when integrated prematurely into the iterative process. Consumers might be too infatuated with the visual-perceived perfection of this prototype, getting into petty details instead of offering substantive comments. This could create biases and prevent users from thinking about alternatives or improving the prototype beyond its visual features (Houde & Hill, 1997). Managing user expectations becomes imperative, fostering an environment where feedback goes beyond the prototype’s appearance and delves into its underlying functionalities and user experience.
Good communication between designers and users is also necessary to solve demanding situations concerning fidelity. Designers must honestly speak about the prototype’s function and obstacles to consumers, ensuring they understand it is only an incomplete preview of what will become a reality. By properly positioning suitable expectations, designers can lead consumers to provide feedback on function, usability, and appearance instead of being blinded by fidelity. Our project employed high-fidelity prototypes to elicit more accurate, actionable user feedback. We used this feedback to anticipate usability problems, identify defects, and validate the design.
Designers must use their specialist knowledge and judgment when deciphering feedback from high-fidelity prototypes. Analyzing user remarks seriously is vital, considering the general layout goals, targets, and constraints. Comments are personal experiences; designers must choose which suggestions fit the project’s goal (Pousman & Stasko 2006). Besides, the constancy approach must be combined with various prototyping approaches and perspectives to develop a complete system. For instance, low-constancy prototypes can be used at the beginning of the layout process to quickly determine and iterate on certain principles or ideas without investing much time or money. These low-fidelity prototypes, consisting of sketches or wireframes, recognize extra conceptual elements and functionality instead of visual fidelity. They serve as a tool for ideation and collaboration, permitting designers to accumulate feedback and refine their concepts earlier than progressing to higher levels of constancy.
Considering Contextual Factors in Prototyping
Prototyping techniques must consider contextual factors like physical, temporal, and social components and customers’ sensory and cognitive elements. In addition, assessment and constant improvement are unavoidable parts of the prototyping process to overcome continuing problems and keep up with the changing preferences among potential audiences. Designers must carefully consider these contextual elements and continue refining the prototype to create an intuitive user interface that greatly enhances general usability (Pousman & Stasko, 2006). Our project applied an in-depth review that included physical and temporal dimensions from nature’s perspective (or order) and social users’ psychological considerations, such as their sensory experience or information atmosphere screens. This information was utilized in making a user-friendly interface for the prototype to improve users’ overall experience.
Conclusion
A complex approach to prototyping integrating theoretical perspectives such as user-centered design and taking account of environmental factors is needed for a good prototype. Such a symbiotic relationship between perspectives and aspects provides designers with a structured method for dealing with multifaceted challenges while providing a comprehensive understanding of stakeholders’ needs. The Partitect project applied perspective in prototyping to create a prototype that meets user needs.
References
Chandra Kruse, L., Purao, S., & Seidel, S. (2022). How designers use design principles: design
Behaviors and application modes. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 23(5), 1235-1270.
Donovan, J., & Gunn, W. (2016). Moving from objects to possibilities. In Design and
Anthropology (pp. 121-134). Routledge.
Hess, T., & Summers, J. D. (2013). Case study: evidence of prototyping roles in conceptual design.
In DS 75-1: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Design for Harmonies, Vol. 1: Design Processes, Seoul, Korea, 19-22.08. 2013.
Houde, S., & Hill, C. (1997). What do prototypes prototype? In the Handbook of Human-Computer
Interaction (pp. 367-381). North-Holland.
Pousman, Z., & Stasko, J. (2006, May). A taxonomy of ambient information systems: four patterns
Of design. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (pp. 67-74).
write