Usability Testing
Research Analysis
Industrial Design
We began by putting together a plan for conducting the usability tests, focusing on our study goals:
Observe how participants interact with both the current carry bag and the prototype
Identify the pain points participants face throughout the experience
Determine which bag provides a better user experience
We tested the carry bag that is currently available for sale, and a prototype designed to address stability concerns.
Load the motor into both bags
Transport the product:
We observed the interactions with the straps and handles
We asked participants to roll the bag over various terrains
Unload the motor from both bags
Provide overall feedback on the experience
We encouraged participants to think aloud as they completed the tasks, allowing us to gain deeper insights into their thoughts and feelings throughout the process. This helped us identify both moments of delight and areas of frustration.
The primary target audience of the Avator carry bags are Avator owners.
To ensure the bag is intuitive and user-friendly for all potential users, we focused on recruiting participants who had never interacted with the carry bag before. Whether they were Avator owners or boaters was not an important consideration for this study.
We recruited 5 participants for the usability tests, all of whom were internal employees at Mercury Marine.
We started with a smaller sample size because this usability study required in-person interaction. For studies that demand more time and engagement from participants, we’ve found that testing with just 5 users is often enough to uncover the majority of usability issues while allowing for deeper qualitative insights.
We conducted 5 in-person usability tests. As a remote team member, I observed and took notes virtually while my teammate moderated the tests on-site. All the studies were also recorded, allowing us to revisit the tests to capture screenshots and any additional notes we might have missed.
All participants successfully completed the usability tests and provided valuable insights, contributing diverse perspectives that supported our study goals.
We organized our findings into affinity maps in Miro by grouping notes and images from the tests into categories based on the different tasks that participants were asked to complete.
We also grouped the notes into “delighter”, “neutral”, and “dissatisfier” categories to quickly identify where the majority of pain points and positive feedback occurred.
After completing the affinity maps for both bags, we extracted key observations and identified a primary finding for each task participants were asked to complete. We then compiled these insights, along with supporting quotes from participants, into a presentation deck.
My teammate and I presented the deck to the shareholders of the project, including members of the Industrial Design team and the Accessory team.
Participants were generally pleased with the convenience of rolling both bags, noting that it offered a comfortable experience and didn’t feel overly heavy to pull.
However, when participants didn’t initially use the inner straps to secure the motor, they were dissatisfied with the rolling experience. The motor would shift, often causing the bag to tip over completely. Ensuring that the motor feels secure during transport is a key concern for users.
“I would want the motor to be even snugger, even if it means its harder to get in the bag. Having it secure is important. With the money I'm spending on the motor, I'd like to make sure it's not getting damaged.”
Participants were not happy when they saw the current bag lean over when they set it down, as it caused concern that the bag was not stable and could easily tip over.
In contrast, when setting down the prototype, it remained more stable, which made participants feel more confident in its design.
The general sentiment among participants was that the motor was easier to remove from the bags than put it in.
Based on the findings from our usability study, the prototype demonstrated significant improvements to the original carry bag's design. After incorporating a few additional adjustments to address pain points identified in both bags, the prototype was finalized by the Industrial Design team and made production-ready to replace the current carry bag on the market.
Once the updated carry bag becomes available for purchase, we will evaluate sales metrics and customer feedback to assess its performance against the original. By comparing user satisfaction, purchase trends, and reviews, we can determine whether the updated design improves the overall experience.
If additional user issues become apparent, we will conduct another round of usability tests to identify and address further improvements.
This was my first time conducting a usability study on a physical product. While the process shared similarities with usability testing for digital prototypes, it also introduced unique challenges that required a different approach. For example, we had to limit the number of participants due to logistical constraints, as testing required in-person interaction. In contrast, digital prototypes can be tested remotely, allowing for a larger and more diverse sample size.
Additionally, making iterative changes to a physical product is more time-consuming and costly compared to digital designs, where adjustments can be implemented and tested almost instantly.