Practical Personas: Built Collaboratively and Purpose-Driven

We’ve been using personas at the University of Arizona Libraries for a good while as design and communication tools for different projects. I’ve learned a lot from our different attempts at persona development, so wanted to share my learnings here. In particular, how we’ve collaboratively created personas, leading to buy-in and shared ownership across the organization.

Previous personas

I believe it was 2011 when we first tinkered in persona development. But we made several missteps on our first attempt. We:

  • based them on assumptions (rather than research)
  • created them in isolation (by the 4-person Website Steering Group of the time)
  • used stock photos and stereotypes

They were pretty silly and simplistic, and didn’t really help us build empathy for our users. I remember the donor persona, in particular, was inspired by Daddy Warbucks and became more of a joke than an actual tool for our conversations.

In 2014, we gave it another go. This time, we created personas specific to our Website Redux project where we were re-designing the digital user experience. We based them on data, including web analytics, usability testing, and surveys. We shared them with the library at a “Meet Our Personas” open house event.

people standing around table learning about personas
“Meet Our Personas” event

These became much more useful, particularly as we incorporated them into the Redux project. We used them in:

  • User stories, the framework for all web development work (e.g. “Cheyenne wants to reserve a room from her smart phone.”)
  • Content planning, as we associated every new or revised web page with particular persona(s)
  • Project updates, as we held monthly brown bags and used them as a basis for much of our work

We also distinguished between our primary and secondary audiences. We had 4 primary personas:

  • Cheyenne, the freshman
  • Brandon, the PhD student
  • Emily, the graduate student and teaching assistant
  • Renee, the faculty member

And 3 secondary personas:

  • Donald, the potential donor
  • Elle, the library staff member
  • Craig, the community user
7 personas from 2014
Snapshot of personas from 2014 website project

2018 Persona Project

Context

Come 2018, a number of things had changed. Our content strategist who provided leadership in persona development, Shoshana Mayden, left for another position on campus. We had hired a new content strategist, Kenya Johnson, who also played the role of marketing and communications manager. I had moved out of the technology unit into our administration, providing vision for our UX work library-wide. We also realized that hey, it’s 2014, and Cheyenne the freshman is graduating.

Most of the library staff were familiar with personas. In addition to having used the 2014 personas for several years in the context of our website, we’d also had a design thinking project in late 2017 that gave library employees the experience of creating their own student and faculty personas. This design thinking project also gave us a wealth of new user research data.

So in spring 2018, Kenya and I started working on developing new personas that could be used library-wide.

Intention

We wanted the new personas to be a bit different. We wanted them to:

  • Be useful and adaptable for different project needs
  • Be inclusive and diverse
  • Avoid stereotyping

We identified the purpose of personas as design and communication tools that:

  • consider the users’ perspective and experience, not ours
  • help us understand our audience
  • encourage us to question our assumptions
  • ensure we focus on what matters to people and has the most impact
  • provide a useful foundation and starting point for any project

We wanted personas to help us:

  • describe and empathize with our target audience
  • get on the same page about who we are designing for
  • guide decisions related to services, products, content, design, and more

Workshops

We invited all library staff to attend collaborative workshops to build our personas. We held multiple workshops at different times to allow people to attend no matter their work schedule.

We ultimately had 35 attendees including people from varied departments including technology, access services, research and learning, health sciences, and marketing. In the first 1-hour workshop, we:

  • reviewed design thinking personas
  • conducted mock user interviews
  • identified behaviors, motivations, and constraints of particular user types
Two people presenting a sketch and sticky notes version of a persona
Second persona workshop

In the second 2-hour workshop, we:

  • created teams; created goals, behaviors, constraints for 5 personas
  • identified names, quotes, and photos for personas
  • presented personas to the larger group in a creative way

Our new personas

Persona for Nate with goals, behaviors, and constraints
Final persona for Nate the navigator

Informed by the outcomes of the workshop, we created the following primary personas:

  • Nate the navigator
  • Sam the scholar
  • Isaiah the instructor
  • Linda the learner

And secondary personas:

  • Esmeralda the explorer
  • Evan the employee

One of the main shifts from our previous set of personas was that these were structured around purpose rather than status. We had discovered over the past few years that many of our services weren’t geared specifically to a demographic such as undergraduates, graduate students, or faculty members. Rather, they were geared towards an audience based on their purpose.

Our research services serve all researchers, whether they are faculty, staff, students, or visiting scholars. Our instructional services serve all instructors, whether they are teaching assistants, faculty, or adjunct faculty.

When consulting with staff on projects, such as research support services, we’d often hear things like, “Well, it could be a PhD student or a faculty member, or maybe even an undergraduate.” So we’d often end up with three or four personas listed as an audience for a service, which was less helpful. So we shifted from thinking about students vs. faculty members and started thinking about learners vs. scholars. And recognized that depending on context, an individual could play the role of different persona identities throughout their experience with the library. Someone might be working on a class assignment in the morning, teaching a course in the afternoon, and navigating library spaces in the evening. We’ve found this to be a much more helpful framing.

Final persona for Sam the scholar

Rollout and training

Kenya and I presented the final personas to our library leadership team, encouraging them to use them in upcoming projects and to share them with staff. We also provided hands-on training to departments upon their request. In one-hour training sessions, we presented the personas and had people break into small groups. They worked through a Project Starter where they came up with a project (usually a real one), identified their primary persona(s), adapted them as needed, and thought through how the persona would help guide their design and communication decisions.

We were hopeful that by developing the personas collaboratively and through the hands-on training sessions, people across the library will find them useful in their daily work.

Adoption and adaption

Since launching the personas, they’ve proved helpful for a variety of projects, including the design of new websites, tutorials, and services. The staff who attended the workshops are also now equipped to develop personas whenever they find them useful.

I’ve probably found our new personas most useful as a starting point. Project teams will take one of the personas and adapt it to best fit their purposes. Since these were created in Powerpoint, they are easy to update to fit a particular need. By providing complete personas as well as adaptable template, we’re helping empower staff to place users at the center of their projects, informing their conversations and their decision making.

Fostering a UX Culture Across Campus

Last week, I presented a talk titled, “Fostering a UX Culture Across Campus” at CNI’s Spring Meeting (the Coalition of Networked Information). It was originally going to be in San Diego in late March, but moved online due to the COVID-19 pandemic, with talks spread out throughout March, April, and May. The slide deck and full recording are below.

Description of the talk:

User experience (UX) is a multidisciplinary venture that encompasses research, design, content, architecture, engineering, and systems. At the University of Arizona, an informal community of practice emerged in 2017 called “UX@UA” to support cross-departmental learning and sharing of resources. This community now includes over 400 students, faculty, and staff who are studying, teaching, and doing UX. Members of the UX@UA leadership team are from the Libraries, Department of English, Eller College of Management, and Digital Learning. In addition to monthly meetup events for sharing knowledge and networking, the group is supporting campus initiatives such as lightweight user testing through a “Tiny Cafe,” a shared participant pool, a drop-in UX consulting hour, a toolkit of reusable templates, and a UX/UI testing zone in the library. In this talk, you will learn how we are building capacity, breaking down silos, and fostering user-centered thinking and practices campus-wide. 

Advancing Student Success: A Design Thinking Workshop

I was honored to be invited to the University of San Diego in January to facilitate the annual retreat for the staff of the Copley Library. Dean Theresa Byrd was interested in something hands-on focused on user experience and design thinking that addressed one of their strategic priorities: student success.

Sharing the slides here.


IT Summit: Creating User-Centered Website Navigation

Over the past several months, our UX team has been preparing for updates to our primary, global drop-down menus on the library’s main website. We started this project in anticipation of significant building renovations and the launch of associated new services to happen in 2020 (see CATalyst Studios). We realized that our existing menu structure didn’t allow for this evolution in our services.

We still have some work to do to before launching our new menus, but in October, I presented with two colleagues, America Curl and Lara Miller, on our progress to date. This was part of the University of Arizona’s IT Summit.

In this talk, we covered our user-centered and content-focused process, with our main techniques being card sorting and tree testing. We’ve also done some prototype testing and first-click testing. Hope you enjoy!

User Interviews: Asking the Right Questions

person interviewing someone at a table
User interview at Tiny Cafe, May 2019

User interviews are a great way to learn about and understand the current user experience. They require asking a lot of questions, so asking the right types of questions matters.

Awhile back, I created a basic training for library employees on how to conduct effective user interviews. I’ve pulled this together as a resource for others.

Don’t lead.

Staying as neutral as possible will ensure more authentic responses from your participants.

Leading questionNon-leading question
Is research funding a big stressor?What has been causing you stress lately?
Did you come to the library to study?Why did you come to the library today?
Have you noticed that it’s cold in the library?What do you notice when you visit the library?
When you said X, did you mean Y?Can you tell me more about what you meant when you said X?

Get them to talk specifics and stories.

What people say is not always what they do, so try asking them to recollect specific experiences.

General questionQuestion that invites specifics and stories
How do you usually conduct research?Can you walk me through your last experience conducting research?
Tell me about your teaching challenges.Tell me about a time you had a teaching challenge and how you handled it.
How do you tend to do that?Can you give me an example?

Be encouraging but neutral.

There are no right or wrong answers, and all insights are valuable. Don’t insert your own reactions or ideas. Try to keep your poker face and manage expectations.

LeadingNeutral
That’s a fantastic idea – I love it!Interesting. Thank you for sharing that.
Yeah, but…I appreciate your ideas.
We tried that once before, but…Thank you, this is really helpful for us to hear.

Listen and dive deeper.

As advocates for our libraries and organizations, we are tempted to talk about ourselves and the services we offer. We also might want to share our own experiences. But this can harm the interview, distracting from the focus: learning about the user.

User interviews are not intended as two-way conversations. As the interviewer, you should ask questions, listen to the responses, then ask more questions. If there’s a moment of silence, that’s fine! Avoid jumping in. Be comfortable with seven-second breaks where no one is speaking. Allow the participant time to process their thoughts and share their experiences.

Avoid such comments as:

  • You probably didn’t know that the library already…
  • We’ve already heard…
  • Don’t worry, we’re trying to….
  • We tried that before but…

Insert “why” and “how” questions to dive deeper.

  • Interesting. Can you tell me why?
  • Why is that important to you?
  • Why did you approach it that way?
  • Interesting. Can you tell me how?
  • How did that make you feel?
  • Why do you think you felt that way?
  • Why is that important to you?
  • How do you currently deal with this?
  • Why does that example come to mind?

Other helpful follow-ups include:

  • Tell me more about…
  • Can you expand on that?
  • Is that what you expected?
  • Can you give me an example?
  • What did you find frustrating about that experience?
  • What might have improved upon that experience?
  • Do you have another example of…?

If participants don’t think they are helping.

Participants will occasionally express concern that they aren’t being helpful. They might say things like, “I don’t know enough about…” or “this probably isn’t the type of response you’re looking for.” To respond to this, try things like:

  • We’d like to hear from everyone and your input is really valuable to use. Can you tell me more about…?
  • This is exactly the sort of information we’d like to hear. Why…?
  • Don’t worry, I have lots of other questions! If you don’t have more to say about ____, can you instead tell me about…?

If participants ask you questions.

Participants occasionally will ask you questions about the project or related services. It’s probably fine to talk with them about these details at the close of the interview (depending on the project), but you want to avoid distracting your conversation with these details while you’re still in the midst of the interview itself.

If a participant starts asking you questions, try something like:

  • I can’t answer that right now, because we’d like to hear from you first. But if you still want to know more when we’re done with the interview, I’m happy to share more.
  • I’m happy to tell you more about X, but first let me ask you…

I hope you find these tips helpful! I’d love to hear more tips or suggestions in the comment sections, as this (like everything) is a work in progress.

Writing Accessible Web Content

I’ve written and taught on the topic of web content for a number of years. And this past year, I’ve been thinking a lot about how our content decisions impact the accessibility and inclusivity of our websites.

Last month, I presented the keynote at a Ferris State University’s symposium, Web Content for Everyone: Usability, Accessibility, and Content Creation. The audience included web developers, marketers, instructors, writers, and other staff from across campus.

The goal of this presentation was to cover the key principles to creating content that is useful, usable, and accessible to all. I discuss techniques including plain language, heading structure, content prioritization, meaningful links, alternative text, and more. My 5 tips for better, more inclusive web content are:

  1. Know your audience. Create content with your readers in mind.
  2. Keep it focused and simple. Reduce cognitive load with straightforward and succinct content.
  3. Focus on clarity. Strive for immediate comprehension.
  4. Organize and structure. Your content flow should be intentional, point-of-need, and easy to skim.
  5. Make it readable. Be intentional with font choice, white space, and formatting.

Big thanks to Ferris State for inviting me, and for recording and captioning the presentation!


A Human-Centered Strategy for Advancing Library Value

I had the privilege of delivering the keynote presentation at this year’s Michigan Academic Library Association (MiALA) Annual Conference. I had been preparing this talk for a few months. I knew I would talk about library value (the theme for the conference) and how user experience practices could help libraries build upon and expand their impact.

I thought I’d share a couple images from my process in putting this together. I began by generating ideas around value we provide to different target audiences: learners, instructors, researchers, community, and campus.

whiteboard mindmap of ideas around "value" and audiences
Initial idea generation and mind mapping

I started working through my slidedeck, then paused to outline what I was trying to do. This was helpful in organizing my ideas and noticing gaps.

whiteboard outline of the talk: design thinking, audiences
Visual outline of the presentation

Here’s my final slidedeck.


Some of my key messages:

  • The mission of academic libraries is tremendous, so we are challenged to focus on what matters most.
  • We should focus where our organizational goals and our user needs overlap.
  • We can use design thinking as a guiding framework: understand, create, validate.
  • We can better understand our users and make user-centered decisions if continually build our capacity for cognitive empathy.
  • While building understanding, we should practice cultural humility and realize we will never be experts of another’s experience, only our own.
  • There are many emerging ways to advance student success by supporting inquiry and learning in a rapidly changing world. We can focus in on some of the things that matter most to students, such as:
    • belonging
    • health
    • financial stability
    • job preparation
  • There are also ways to excel researcher productivity by supporting creative endeavour, scholarly communication, and the global academic community. We can focus on what matters most to scholars, such as:
    • expertise
    • research data
    • publishing
  • For members of our community, we can support social, cultural, and economic impact. We can focus on things like:
    • lifelong learning
    • preparing youth
    • local economy
    • local partnerships

Overall, I really enjoyed this project and hope people enjoyed the talk.

If I were to do it again, I would find a way to incorporate empathy and understanding towards ourselves, both personally and as organizations. It can be overwhelming to think of all the possibilities of what academic libraries could be doing, and we need to be mindful of our own barriers and challenges as well as those of our end users.

Also, MiALA was a blast. Great conference. I learned a lot.

Tips for Making Better Forms

icon of a form

Forms are prevalent across the web, yet so many are poorly designed. They can quickly become a source of frustration.

Last year, Ann Shivers-McNair and I bonded over our passion for form content and design. So we developed a presentation on making better forms for people, presented at edUi last October.

Forms have been on my mind a lot recently, and I thought it would be useful to unpack the presentation into some of the key principles and considerations for easy reference. And I’ve added and slightly revised a couple based on other things I’m learning. So here goes.

3 key principles

Simplicity. Avoid the complicated and unnecessary.

  • Avoid instructions on how to fill out the form
  • Make sure every field serves a purpose
  • Get rid of any unnecessary fields (e.g. phone number, fax number, birthdate)
  • Never require a field if you don’t really need it

Inclusivity. Create forms for everyone.

  • Avoid jargon
  • Avoid legalese
  • Write like you talk
  • Be inclusive in your options

Readability. Use logical sequencing and follow conventions.

  • Be succinct
  • Place field labels above the field
  • Left justify, rag right
  • Allow for lots of white space
  • Use sentence case

Small but mighty considerations

Form names. Make it clear what you’re doing.

  • Start with a precise action verb (e.g. “Apply,” “Request”)
  • Use an action verb in the link to the form, too (e.g. “RSVP for event”)
  • Avoid too many nouns in a row

Optional vs. required fields. Make them intuitive to recognize. (Be aware these conventions are a moving target and may depend upon audience).

  • Most fields should be required
  • Indicate which fields are optional by saying optional
  • Be consistent in how you indicate required vs. optional fields
  • Asterisks are a common convention to mean “required”

Name fields. Make them inclusive.

  • Don’t limit character length (or if you must limit, make that limit 70 characters for full name or 50 characters for first name or last name)
  • Don’t force first-letter capitalization (e.g. charley)
  • Don’t prevent capitalization of a second name or within a name (e.g. Bonnie Jean; McClelland)
  • Allow hyphens in names (e.g. Sykes-Casavant)
  • Use one “Full name” field over separate “First name” and “Last name” field, unless it’s really necessary

Gender fields. Make them inclusive.

  • Avoid binary gender selectors
  • Allow write-in responses
  • Make it optional (when possible)

Selectors. Give clear options.

  • Pick a thoughtful default that’s either the most common answer or the first in a logical sequence
  • Put the most common options at the top, and for longer lists, use alphabetical sequencing
  • Use the right selector for the information you are soliciting (e.g. dropdowns, radio buttons, check boxes)

Question scope. Ask one question at a time.

  • Don’t combine multiple questions into one
  • Isolate the pieces of information you are asking for
  • Use logic to order questions that follow from previous information

Contextual help. Provide helpful hints at the appropriate time. (Be aware these conventions are a moving target and may depend on audience).

  • Use field labels to describe the field, and place them above the field
  • Use help text to provide an explanation or further information
  • Maybe use placeholder text to suggest the type of content you expect
  • Be cautious with placeholder text, and don’t use it as a substitute for field labels or help text

Feedback messages. Provide informative messages at the right time.

  • Make it clear when there are errors
  • Make it clear what any errors are
  • Don’t stress users out with error messages before it’s necessary
  • In confirmation messages, make it clear what the user just did and what to expect next

The slidedeck

Here’s the slidedeck that these tips were based on. It includes a few more details and a whole bunch of examples.

Hope you find this helpful! Please share comments on other things I should add.

Gathering Feedback on Library Furniture

When the UX team moved out of the technology department to be housed centrally in administration, I knew we’d expand our scope to include projects related to physical space. I didn’t know that for two weeks at the end of the fall semester, I’d be immersed in a furniture study to quickly gather feedback from students on dozens of furniture options. It was a new thing for the UX team. It was interesting. And I thought I’d share what we did.

two people talking in a collaborative furniture setup
Preliminary user interviews about furniture in spring 2018 (that’s me on the left)

Context

We’re undergoing a massive, multi-million dollar renovation to our Main and Science-Engineering Libraries. Part of the renovation includes new furniture for our ground floors. In early November, 2018, we received dozens of chairs, a few tables, and a couple pieces of lounge furniture to pilot for a few weeks. They were placed throughout the Main Library ground floor, with tags identifying them.

We were given a quick timeline to gather as much feedback as we could from students to guide decisions. The UX team (3 of us) worked with our new assessment librarian, Lara Miller, and staff from access services, John Miller-Wells and Michael Principe.

Methods

Michael and John created a survey with Qualtrics that people could take online or fill out in person. They have student workers dedicated to data collection who collected observational data (primarily counts of furniture usage) and transcribed the print survey results.

Screenshot of survey questions: letter of option, rate this option, and tell us more
Survey we provided in person and online

Lara and the UX team conducted more qualitative observations, and did some informal interviews with people using the furniture.

We placed stock photos that the companies gave us (just a selection of some of the furniture) on boards in the space and asked people to mark their favorites with sticky notes. Realizing quickly that this did little to tell us why pieces were marked, we asked participants to also describe the furniture in a few words.

Stock photos with instructions to tell us what you think by putting sticky notes next to your favorites and describing in 1-2 words
Stock photos with instructions for passersby to vote on their favorites and describe them

Getting close to the end of the pilot, we realized we didn’t have as much feedback as we wanted on particular choices, such as the laptop tables. We also wanted to compare some specific stools and specific chairs side-by-side.

To get this feedback, we posted photos of the pilot furniture on a large whiteboard and then placed the actual furniture nearby. We asked participants to mark their favorites with green sticky dots and their least favorites with red sticky dots. (We since realized this would be an issue for colorblind users, so in future might use something like stars and sad faces instead).

Whiteboard with votes surrounded by pilot furniture and students testing the furniture out
Pilot furniture placed around a whiteboard where students could provide feedback

Limitations

We were short on time, it was near the end of the semester, and we had a lot of furniture to get feedback on. The stock photos also didn’t match the pilot furniture exactly.

Stock photos of lounge furniture with sticky notes and descriptions like "flexible" and "outlets!"
Feedback on popular stock photos – we didn’t actually have this furniture as part of the pilot

It’s hard to get authentic feedback on this type of thing. Most of the data we collected was attitudinal rather than behavioral. And if we really want to make the best decisions for our students, we should know what they do not just what they think. The best way to discover how students actually use the furniture and what they prefer might be an ethnographic study, but we didn’t have time or resources for that.

A significant issue with most of our methods is that students could vote on a chair for aesthetic reasons (color, shape) when they haven’t actually used it in any real capacity. So a chair could score highly because it’s attractive but not particularly functional, especially for long periods of study.

The decision making process at the end of the day was also unclear, as it’s a negotiation between the library project team, the architects, and the vendors. We can provide the data we collected, but then it’s essentially out of our hands.

Findings

We ended up with 283 completed surveys, 606 sticky notes on the stock photos, and 573 sticky dots on the whiteboards (we removed the stickies as we went so the boards wouldn’t get overwhelmed). We also had 13 days worth of usage data and a handful of notes from qualitative observations.

While we had a couple of hundred survey results, since each survey only referred to a single piece of furniture it was hard to make any conclusions (just 0-5 pieces of feedback per piece). We found that the comparative data was much more useful, and in retrospect would have done more of this from the get go.

We put together all the data and in December were able to present a selection of furniture we recommended and didn’t recommend for purchase.

In the chairs category, most of the recommendations were adjustable, on wheels, with arms, and with fabric seats. For stools, the ability to adjust up and down for people of different heights was especially important. Those chairs we didn’t recommend tended to have hard plastic seats or metal arms, be non-adjustable, or be less comfortable for longer term use.

whiteboard with images of stools and chairs and voting with sticky dots
Stools and chairs comparison – results of preference voting

The winning laptop tables had larger surfaces (to fit a laptop and a mouse/notebook), felt sturdier, and the legs could fit under a variety of chairs or tables.

whiteboard with images of laptop tables and voting dots on each image
Laptop table comparison – results of preference voting

Overall, we didn’t find anything groundbreaking in the data. But we do now have some solid recommendations to share with the powers that be. And we did learn a lot just through the process, which was in many ways an experiment for us:

  • how to gather data on people’s attitudes around furniture
  • how to act quickly and iterate on our process
  • it’s possible to gather a bunch of data in a short, focused amount of time
  • a mixed methods approach works best for this type of thing (as it does for most things!)

User Experience Strategy – Webinar Recordings

Last month I gave two, two-hour online presentations for III’s Hot Topics series. The topic was user experience strategy.

Both sessions were recorded and are available for free (you just need to register and provide your email).

Watch session one, where I cover:

  • The design thinking process
  • User research methods for understanding
  • Techniques for exploring ideas and solutions
  • Examples of testing and iteration
  • Design and content principles

Watch session two, where I cover:

  • Recap of session one
  • Case studies
  • UX as a culture
  • UX as a process

Hope you enjoy!