U-M Economic Growth Institute - Web Tool
Client and Funder: NIST: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Web Consultant - Palantir.net
Duration: April - Nov 2018
Type: Group and Individual (later)
My Role: UX Researcher and Designer
Scroll Down
Overview
The U.S. Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) selected the University of Michigan’s Economic Growth Institute to study successful collaborations between public research universities and private technology developers as well as federal research laboratories (FRLs).
The full description of the project can be found here.
Goal
A final deliverable of this project will include a prototype of a web-based, interactive “Practitioner Best Practice Evaluation Tool”. The proposed prototype will provide tailored feedback and guidance for technology developers seeking to collaborate regionally or nationally on accelerating technology commercialization. The website will provide background information on major technology-development sectors and clusters, as well as identify major players both within and outside of universities and federal research labs.
UX Team
-
Elizabeth Austic, Senior Research Project Manager
-
Nalin Bhatia, UX Graduate Research Associate
-
David Williams , UX and Web Intern
Stakeholder Interviews
Since very sparse literature existed online relevant to our scope, we conducted a total of 10 user experience interviews with stakeholders across different areas to better understand their practices, and the challenges the experience in the process of technology development.
Duration: Sept 2017 - Dec 2017
Industry
Universities
FRLs*
+
+
+
+
+
4
CEOs or founders of startups in the midwest
1
person who has developed technology as part of a university spin-off
2
professors at IEPUs* who commercialized a technology they developed
1
head of the technology transfer office of a non-IEP university.
1
investigator conducting another NIST study examining technology transfer in federal labs
1
head of a federal technology transfer office
*IEPUs = nnovation & Economic Prosperity Universities, FRLs = Federal Research Labs
Key Takeaways
Through these interviews, the UX and Web Design Team has gained a deeper understanding of what potential users of the website will be hoping to get from using it and how information may be presented in a helpful and constructive way. Following were the three key takeaways:
The Importance of Collaboration and Networking
Good collaborations are integral to successfully commercializing a product or technology
Differences in Technology Transfer Approaches
As might be expected, the approach to technology transfer and creating spin-off companies is different for almost every individual or organization
Sector and Cross-sector collaboration
Industry collaboration more geared towards cross-sector and FRLs + academia more towards within their sector
Affinity Diagram
After consolidating notes from each interview, we gathered 300 data points and organized them with the Affinity Diagramming method to obtain our key research findings. The images below gives an overview of what our version of affinity wall looked like.
Duration: Sept 2017 - Dec 2017
Key Findings
The affinity diagram exercise enabled us to define the pressing requirements of the users, and across which themes they lie. This ultimately helped us to define the journey of our user, and the architecture of the tool.
Duration: Sept 2017 - Dec 2017
Personas
Based on the findings from the Affinity Diagramming Exercise, the users' needs and pain-points were clear and we were able to create 4 different user personas who will be the primary users of our web-tool.
User Journey Mapping
To define our key features for the web-tool, we needed to first create a user journey map for the end to end technology commercialization process, and based on the issues identified at the different stages of the user journey, we come up with features that would address those issues. Following is the customer journey map across the different stages of the technology development process.
Duration: Sept 2017 - Dec 2017
Brainstorming and Design Synthesis
Based on our research, we brainstormed several ideas and further proposed our design to function like a website and encompassing: 1) an interactive tool for more personalized recommendations including an interactive map to locate technology clusters, and 2) More generalized information for less tech-savvy users.
Users
Users
Federal Researchers
Inventors
Univ. Profs.
Post-Docs, Researchers
Industry Professionals
Industry Professionals
Features
Simple clear design that resonates with majority of the users' familiarity
Interactive tool for guided personalized recommendations
General resource information applicable to all
Interactive map to locate tech. clusters to collaborate based on preferences
Guided user journey flow
Architecture Mapping
Based on the customer journeys and findings before, a site architecture map was created to help inform the design of wireframes
Wireframes
The next step was creation of wireframes based on the ideas extracted from the User Journey Map. There were further shared with our external web consultants - Palantir
Below are a few initial wireframes.
Duration: Sept 2017 - Dec 2017
Low-fi prototype
A low-fi prototype is currently in progress to be submitted to Palantir to communicate a better understanding of the design ans flow
Iterations
Iteration 1
Based on the user testing session, I received the following feedback, and made the respective iterations:
Feedback: 'Pathways to Innovation' and 'Cross-sector collaboration' are meant to be used by Researchers/Inventors and Industry Leader specifically, hence the flows need to be tailored accordingly
Revision: An interactive tool which specifically caters to comprises of cross-sector collaboration and pathways to innovation
Feedback: The user flow is currently more 'exploratory' and needs to be more 'directional'
Revision: 1) More simplified and streamlined user journey.
2) A landing homepage which directs to the user to the specific part of the tool based on their role.
Feedback: 'Thought Leaders' are mostly concerned with general information related to their sector.
Revision: Thought leaders would be led to a separate section which covers general information about the sector and best practices.
Feedback: Maps should be accessible by all as a reference
Revision: A separate tool called 'Resource Maps' accessible from the home page and independent of the interactive tool.
Final Iteration
Based on the final usability assessment, I received the following feedback, and made the respective iterations:
Feedback: "No way to know what my responses are, and if I need to revise them"
Revision: Appropriate feedback and ability to revise responses.
Feedback: Support required when entering responses.
Revision: A collaborative learning center feature.
Hi-fi Prototype
The above design was handed over to EGI after approval and will be in development on securing additional funding from NIST.
Conclusion