The LAWA process

LAWA was an exercise in design collaboration, which meant we had to explain the process. This necessitated a certain amount of pre-emptive reflection about what, exactly, we do as designers – the seemingly innate steps we take.

In August I presented at a freshwater science conference with Kati Doehring, an ecologist from Cawthron. The session was on science communication, and we used LAWA as a case study – an example of how design can aid scientists in communicating complex subjects. In the presentation, I described the LAWA design process thus:

The LAWA design process

 Discover

This phase sought to understand and frame the brief, the scope, and the objectives, and to build understanding with the scientists who were part of the LAWA team. This phase clarified what data was available, but it also involved understanding the data collection process (a first stage in a process of empathy building).

Having accompanied a council scientist to a local river and asked myriad ‘stupid questions’,  the value of demonstrating to users exactly what sits behind the data became clear. Not only would this demonstrate transparency through disclosure of the process and methods, but also because it adds a human element, which is important from a credibility perspective (Fogg et al., 2002). This experience was also the progenitor for the focus on learning resources in LAWA.

Understand

With assistance from Horizons Regional Council and Cawthron, we held two user workshops with participants including recreational users, iwi, farmers, scientists, Fish & Game staff, conservation volunteers and Open Lab designers.

In coordinated but reasonably fluid sessions, users were asked to describe their involvement with water, and to define, in an ideal world, what this new web tool would do for them. This process of building empathy with users yielded highly informative insights (Appendix III) and though user engagement makes the design process more complex (Forlizzi & Ford, 2000, p.422-423), it was a critical stage in defining the requirements of the project.

Research

At this point, LAWA was not called LAWA – we were tasked with defining the identity as part of our brief ­– so this research phase incorporated looking at brands in the environmental data and freshwater space, and also looking in detail at other websites conveying water quality data. No sites were identified performing the same functions that were envisaged for LAWA, but some best practice precedents (Appendix IV) for individual components of the site were identified.

Ideation

This phase involved brainstorming, collating ideas and starting to conceptualise how the site might be structured and how it might function. Ideas were shared with the LAWA steering group, who identified constraints, generally around organisational buy-in. Getting ideas on the table was key – some (incorporating recreational water quality for instance) were vetoed at this stage, but with the backup of the findings from user workshops, it was possible to negotiate them back into the scope of the project.

Design (share, test, repeat)

This phase is the iterative design process proper. Wireframing and user journey testing informed concept designs and prototypes, progress was shared with stakeholders for feedback, and designs were refined many times over before the developers were handed the designs to start the build. The process was then repeated with the developers, until the test site reached a stage where it could be released as an alpha site to share with a wider group. Testing and iterative changes are ongoing, and thebeta launch to council users in mid-December will necessitate further rounds of iterative improvements.

Implementation (in progress)

Final user testing will take place and the site will be assessed against the criteria set in the first phase. The site will be made public in mid-2014, then feedback will be gathered, which can be used to inform further development.


Next: Web credibility