Team: S. Nieves, S. Noä, D. Costa; Germany, 2011 (6 months)
My role: UX Research, Recruiting, Content strategy
My role: UX Research, Recruiting, Content strategy
Context
This joint venture of Nokia, G&D and SAP funded a Start-Up that intended to fight counterfeiting. The basic product was already implemented in China, where being sure whether a product, document or medicine is authentic is a bigger issue. They wanted to enter the European app with this service. When I joined the team there was already a product framework into place. Like the Chinese app, the product used production, register codes and trade data in order to estimate its authenticity.
Problem
Define B2B and B2C functionalities for the European market.
Strategy and Solution
Through qualitative research we found out what is relevant for the consumer and sketched first possible solutions.
A | Scenario
B | Research
1 | Workshop with Stakeholders
Planing / Recruiting: S. Nieves
Participants: 12 People (Designers, Sales Managers, Data Scientists, Engineers, CEO, and Developers)
Goals: Team building, pairing goals, generate solutions.
Participants: 12 People (Designers, Sales Managers, Data Scientists, Engineers, CEO, and Developers)
Goals: Team building, pairing goals, generate solutions.
Method I - Build on each other's ideas
Two rounds of collaborative Brainstorming followed by a final presentation.
Method II - CSD Matrix (certainties, suppositions, doubts)
In group we invited the participants to name the main goal of their solutions, which we then organized according to our levels of certaintiy.
Outcome
The brainstorming extended our repertoire of features and solutions. The CSD Matrix allowed us to convince other stakeholders that we cannot be so sure about the relevance of many solutions, without bringing in the users.
Ultimately, we could bring the team closer together.
Ultimately, we could bring the team closer together.
Focus groups | Potential users
Planing / Recruiting: D. Costa
Participants: 10 people Balanced by gender and age groups.
Goals: (i) Get more insight about consumerism in Europe; (ii) Generate awareness about desired features and benefits.
Participants: 10 people Balanced by gender and age groups.
Goals: (i) Get more insight about consumerism in Europe; (ii) Generate awareness about desired features and benefits.
Method I - Cards Sorting
Each card depicted a product and the participants talked about how they based their purchase decisions. The cards were then sorted in different categories (source and amount of information)
Method II - Brainstorming
Topic Organizing question: "if you had a magnifying glass that could reveal anything about a product, what would you want to know?"
After brainstorming the features in group, participants had to individually choose three features and build a product concept around their magnifying glasses.
After brainstorming the features in group, participants had to individually choose three features and build a product concept around their magnifying glasses.
Outcome
We could have a better sense of what users desire to know and features they value the most.
Besides showing our preconceptions about counterfeiting didn't correspond to user's concerns. User's do not mind counterfeiting on it's on sake - only when it might have harmful ethical consequences (for health or social exploitation). A survey with more participants would have been necessary to further pad these findings with quantitative data.
Besides showing our preconceptions about counterfeiting didn't correspond to user's concerns. User's do not mind counterfeiting on it's on sake - only when it might have harmful ethical consequences (for health or social exploitation). A survey with more participants would have been necessary to further pad these findings with quantitative data.
Secondary Research | Desk research
Our findings agreed on key points with the BASCAP's report of 2009. They conduct focus groups and quantitative surveys in the UK, Mexico, India, Russia, and South Korea
Results | Highlights
Products that the user feel they need more information
a. Expensive Electronics
b. Medicines
c. "Healthy" products (food, cosmetics)
b. Medicines
c. "Healthy" products (food, cosmetics)
Top desired features
a. Ethics check (labor, animal rights, etc.)
b. Provenience (life cycle, resources, etc.)
c. Certiications & Labels
b. Provenience (life cycle, resources, etc.)
c. Certiications & Labels
Results | Insights
C | Content Proposal
Individuating B2B and B2C products
The results of the focus groups helped us to sort out our data and determine the relevant contents for the B2B and B2C products.
My last contribution in the team was to categorize the data types and to makes suggestions about which kind of data would be explicitly and implicitly available in both products.
More than stating a product authenticity it was defended that Smarteye should be able to make other statements, concerning substances used, equal opportunity, Fairtrade, and so on.
More than stating a product authenticity it was defended that Smarteye should be able to make other statements, concerning substances used, equal opportunity, Fairtrade, and so on.
B2B - "Objective" data first
It presents the authenticity status followed by the data to back it up (production and trade numbers as well as histogram of the checks).
B2C - "Subjective" data first
It presents a summary of certification and labels, health and ethical red-flags, as well as peer and specialist reviews. Production and Manufacturer data are presented in a way to explain a product's provenience.
