3 months
UX Research/ Design Research
Design Researcher (within a 12-person core research team)
Qualtrics, Adobe Creative Suite, R
1. limited audience reading research report and engaging with brain health research conducted internally
2. poor understanding of users (employee) ideal workplace preferences and current pain points of their work environment
Design a workshop experience based on the brain health research for internal audiences to re-think and learn about their workplace preferences.
Worked as a design researcher within a 12-person core research team
1. Project development brief (research purposes, objectives, key research methods, protocols, estimated timeline, outcome, impact)
2. 8 interactive experience prototypes for users to engage with current internal research on brain health and learn about their current pain points about employee’s current workplace and preference for ideal workplaces for brain health
3. Qualitative and quantitative data analysis from data collected on all 8 interactive experiences
4. Data visualization & presentation to team including higher management
1. 30+ internal sign ups for the experience workshop
2. Created 8 interactive activity prototypes to obtain key understanding of user’s current and ideal time allocations during their workday, and pitched suggestions for potential future research to higher management
3. Created the first prototype for experiential learning and became the groundwork for a later exhibition on brain health open to both internal and public audiences.
1. Time constraints: defining objectives, ideating, collecting data, and synthesizing data all had to be done in 12 weeks
2. Resource constraints: lacked certain resources for physiological measurements (e.g. EEG)
Our team used the design thinking framework (define, design, deliver) for this project.
Firms are nudging their staff to rejoin the physical workspace, but many are still enjoying the balance of working both from home and the office. This prompts an essential reconsideration: What's the real value of being in the office? As the dialogue around mental well-being and work-life harmony grows, it brings the health of our brain into focus.
Considering our brain as the control center for emotions and decisions, can our workplaces contribute to its well-being and foster stronger connections among us? How might we adapt or innovate our work environments to best serve our cognitive and communal needs?
With this large, complex (but very important) question, HKS collaborated with the Center for Brain Health to release a Brain Health Report, highlighting prior research findings. Yet, two issues arose (validated through internal surveys and low downloads before I joined).
01
Many employees didn't read the report, leaving them uninformed about brain health's significance in the workplace (employee A: “what is brain health?”).
02
Previous research provided broad insights into brain health and improvement strategies, but lacked details on individual preferences and needs, which could vary by job role.
Our team had clear goals and objectives in what we wanted to accomplish with these problems in mind. We wanted to create an interactive experience workshop, where:
Users learn about brain health and its significance in the workplace
Users can explore and rethink their daily work, habits, and what they value in spaces for brain health
It can foster future research that drives innovative practices and leads to projects designed for impact
We had several constraints that had to be kept in mind for the duration of the project.
01
WORKSHOP DURATION. We set a firm 40-minute limit for the experience workshop. Our goal was to offer an engaging and interactive user experience, but we didn't want participants, who were our busy internal employees, to invest more than 40 minutes. It was essential to make our activities concise yet impactful.
02
PROJECT TIMELINE. I spearheaded this project as an intern with a fixed 12-week timeframe. This meant defining objectives, brainstorming ideas, collecting data, and synthesizing that data all within this period. Consequently, decision-making had to be swift, even if potentially better solutions might have existed.
03
RESOURCE LIMITATIONS. Initially, we intended to provide real-time demonstrations of how workplace habits, like multitasking, affect the brain. However, we lacked certain resources for physiological measurements, such as EEGs.
Keeping our goals and constraints in mind, I came up with some key research questions:
01
How can we optimize our workday concerning affordances like focus, collaboration, rest, and socialization? How do variations appear across job roles?
02
How are the ideal environments for each affordance described? What characteristics are commonly noted, and do distinctions exist among different roles?
03
How do perceptions of time management, aimed at peak performance, differ across roles?
Our primary focus was on fostering user engagement rather than a mundane computer-based response collection.
Primary data. Interactive activities capturing both qualitative and quantitative data. We adopted the experience learning framework (Do, Reflect, Think, Apply), known for inspiring creativity and action, over passive learning methods.
Secondary data. Surveys (Qualtrics), 1:1 interviews (in-person, Zoom), A/B testing, focus group interviews.
Participants. We sourced a diverse internal group, categorizing them as designers and non-designers. Given HKS's architectural background, we wanted insights on how ideal brain health workplaces differ between these two categories.
Physiological Measures Limitation. We wanted to provide users real-time feedback on the impact of prevalent workplace habits (e.g. multitasking) on one's brain. However, The most significant hurdle was our inability to use cutting-edge physiological measures (e.g. EEG).
Our ideation revolved around formulating interactive measures to address our research questions effectively. We conceptualized an optimal user flow, considering the allocated physical space. We ended up with 8 interactive activities supplemented with an engaging Qualtrics survey (not all shown below).
All activities were conducted in-person, deviating from traditional computerized settings to amplify engagement. Data collection methods varied from pencil-paper, Qualtrics surveys, to creative responses using strings, sticky notes, and sketches.
For the sake of brevity, only one activity's results are shared. I utilized R for data analysis and visualization, implementing various statistical tests like ANOVA, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, chi-square tests, and graph analysis.
Average Time Spent Currently Across All Roles
01. Universally, most time is devoted to focusing with minimal breaks.
Differences in Current vs. Ideal Across All Roles
02. Both designers and non-designers would like to focus less and take more breaks (p = 0.057, p = 0.056)
Differences in Current vs. Ideal Within Designers
03. Designers significantly differ in their break-taking habits. (p = 0.024)
Differences in Current vs. Ideal Within Non-designers
04. Non-designers' preferences lean towards reduced focus and increased collaboration, although the difference isn't statistically significant- this is likely due to the small sample size.
The insights I gathered were showcased to senior management and key stakeholders. I also proposed future research avenues, enhancement opportunities, and potential avenues for business growth and client engagement.
While our study differentiated between designers and non-designers, it's essential to acknowledge that even within these broad categories, individual variations exist.
Delve deeper into the nuanced individual differences. For instance, how do ideal workplace settings vary based on experience levels and age? This could yield richer insights and cater to a broader spectrum of employee needs.
