My Portfolio

Physical Product Interaction Concept Testing 

<< BACK

5 minute read

Understanding how users would interact with a new physical product feature.

The Challenge
We wanted to know how chemists approach installation of a column into an LC (liquid chromatography) instrument. In addition, we were interested in knowing how they track their columns in the system (via its associated software), and whether they were interested in a feature that made it easier to track and reorder columns.

Specifically, we were curious to know whether they'd care about and use an automatic way to record and track column product data. We set out with a UX research study to find answers.

The Team
I was the UX researcher on the project team, which also consisted of a chemistry product manager, a chemist, and a mechanical engineer.

The Prototype
The chemistry team created two prototype "scanners" -- similar to what you'd find in a grocery store -- using CAD software and a 3-D printer. For both prototypes, we purchased two simple infrared scanners for use with QR codes, and the chemistry product team produced a sample product label to be affixed to a sample column.

In addition to the two 3-D printed prototype scanners, we asked participants to use either their own smartphone or one provided in our lab, to test out using their phone's simple QR code functionality in lieu of a separate scanner.

Research Questions
The project team wanted the concept study to answer the following questions:​

• What is the current workflow, including the trigger, for inserting/changing a column and setting up the system to use the new column?
• How do users currently track columns?
• What would be the workflow for using a QR scanner to identify a column?
• What do users expect happens in the LC system when they scan a column?
• Do users prefer a hand-held scanner or a scanner that's integrated into the LC system?
• Do users think that using a QR scanner instead of manually typing in the part number and serial number improves the experience?
• Would users prefer to use a personal mobile device to receive the digital CoA (Certificate of Authenticity) or do any other interactions for this workflow, or would they insist on a work device or desktop workstation?

​
The target personas for this study were Lead QC Specialist and QC Specialist.

UX Research Method: Moderated In-person Usability Testing
The study participants were 6 internal Waters chemists who matched the personas, and the study was conducted on-site at Waters' Experience Design Center (XDC).

We decided not to randomize the order of the two scanner prototypes (hand-held and integrated) for each participant. We asked them to try out their mobile phone first, then the hand-held scanner, and finally the integrated scanner. We did it this way because we felt it was more important to build up an understanding of how to scan the QR code in the first place than it was to eliminate any potential order bias.

Before starting the first task, the participants were asked a series of interview questions to ascertain how they currently change columns, and whether they currently track column information. Then for each usability task, the start and end times were recorded to ascertain whether there were significant differences between participants and between the two prototypes.

In addition, a Single Ease Question (SEQ) -- on a 7-point scale -- was asked after each task was completed, and then the participant was asked to explain their rating.

At the very end of each usability session, the participant was then asked to explain what they would change in either of the prototypes if they could only change one thing. Finally, they were asked to pick which prototype they preferred.

The Bottom Line
All of the participants liked the idea of a QR code on the column label, but expressed a concern that it would need to be heat resistant to allow for the high temperatures often used in an LC instrument. The majority of participants preferred the integrated scanner, although the hand-held scanner received a higher SEQ score.

Due to some usability issues inherent in the 3-D printed integrated scanner prototype, participants rated it lower than the handheld – despite the fact that they voiced a preference for the integrated when asked the preference question. Perhaps if the functionality of the integrated were the same as that for the handheld, the SEQ for the integrated would have be higher. The way to use the integrated was different from the way to use the handheld. Basically, participants liked the point-and-click of the handheld, especially since they didn’t have to worry as much about how far of a distance they held the column label from the scanner – unlike with the integrated.

Overall, the concept of a QR code-scannable column was deemed a success, and the project team decided to iterate on the idea of a scanner.