Philosophy

There are five main tenets of our design process, which are:

1. Data gathering is the backbone of research
In user research, alongside data-points on participants’ aspirations, it is key to capture their actual intentions. Their reactions, in-session performances, aspirations, and/or general understanding of a system provide insights and help us connect the dots. A researcher, thus, requires to follow a well-thought-of action plan to plant ‘capture points that effectively form the general paradigm. This can only be achieved by the clarity attained by immersing totally in the problem. When starting from scratch, We always try to;
1. Set Goals — and always remember the objective of the study in the simplest words, and keep working with the plan.
2. Identify targets — find participants and artifacts that actually get affected by the identified problem.
3. Triangulate[1] — include multiple perspectives in the research and maintain the objectivity of the study. It is also important to be an active observer with a birds-eye view.
4. Take effective notes — capture all the data efficiently. Tools can vary from hand-written detailed notes to audio and video recordings.
‍
Furthermore, keep recalling the study goals and why you’re doing this study. Findings are just the outcomes of the process
‍
2. A structured and systematic approach is the keyIn the field of design and research, data management is a crucial aspect of the job. With multiple project requirements, assumptions, findings, and concepts to juggle, it's easy to become overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information. A process-driven approach to organizing data is therefore essential for success in this line of work. As the project progresses, the amount and complexity of information only increases, making systematic categorization even more critical. By organizing data in a structured and logical way, we can make sense of it and derive valuable insights and solutions. Additionally, revisiting and mapping initial data and findings is an important step in ensuring that we stay on track and don't miss any important details.
‍2. Complex problems get overwhelming. Find and design to solve for the crux of the problem.
Designing solutions for complex problems can be a daunting task. However, by taking a holistic approach and considering the broader context, the process of problem-solving becomes more manageable. At Wisebro, we strive to break down the problem into its fundamental components and strip away any extraneous details. This approach provides us with clarity and a deeper understanding of the issue at hand, allowing us to ask relevant questions, break it down into workflows and smaller tasks, and create an effective plan of action.

“But don’t go because you’ve fallen in love with solvability. Go because you’ve fallen in love with complexity. Don’t go because you want to do something virtuous. Go because you want to do something difficult.” (Martin, 2016)

‍4. Human-Computer Interaction should never harm the Human-Human Interaction.
Technology is changing the way we experience life. Simultaneously, we are getting introduced to new risks, and concerns, which can increase both social tension and social seclusion between users and non-users. Sherry Turkle, in her TedTalk, talks about how social interactions on the internet give users the ability to represent the best version of themselves, and that they can make edits — “not too much, not too little, just about right.” That way, users are always connected, always interacting, always sharing, but still not making a conversation. Even when they seem to be always instant messaging on their devices, continually gawking at the screens, and even sleeping with their phones! This new form of ‘social interaction, though, has merits; raises many concerns. I, as a user, always evaluate my design decisions to work in tandem with the Human-Human connection, by making use of technology to improve and aid bonds. It is undeniable that Technology, in the context of social and collaborative computing, has spurred groundbreaking developments in domains such as healthcare, organizational communication, and education. I believe that righteousness and intent to do good should always be an integral part of the design decisions I make.
‍5. Always receive design-critique with a grain of salt.
Design is an iterative process, and when designing for users, there is no single perfect solution. Therefore, useful user feedback plays a vital role. However, it is often observed that users lack the necessary experience to provide a well-framed, compelling critique. Even experts can sometimes provide feedback that may throw off a designer.  

Users easily delineate from the issues in the context of the interface and start questioning the product idea. This problem is all too familiar, as designers and clients can often spend hours discussing minor details that are not relevant to the current phase of the design process.
‍
“Experts may not necessarily produce feedback with a better writing style, but they provided stronger and clearer justifications for their critique. These findings motivate further investigation into how feedback systems can structure high-quality feedback” (Yuan, A. et al., 2016).
‍


‍References[1] Kolko, Jon. “Thinking about People (Links to an external site.)” from Thoughts on Interaction Design. 2011. pp. 20–39[2] Moggridge, Bill. “People (Links to an external site.)” from Designing Interaction. 2007. pp. 664–681[3] Alvin Yuan, et. al. 2016. Almost an Expert: The Effects of Rubrics and Expertise on Perceived Value of Crowdsourced Design Critiques. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ‘16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1005–1017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819953[4] Tanner Christensen, (2016). Four Things Working at Facebook Has Taught Me about Design Critique.[5] Bevan, N (n.d). What is the difference between the purpose of usability and user experience evaluation methods?. Retrieved from:http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.460.6252&rep=rep1&type=pdf/(Links to an external site.)[6] James McGarry (2017) Evaluation methods and why we need them. Retrieved from https://medium.com/ux-news/evaluation-methods-4dd717d29a9[7] Jenny Preece et al. (2002). “Chapter-13:” Introducing Evaluation” in Interaction Design: Beyond human-computer interaction