• http://www.jennycham.co.uk/?page_id=416

    Tips on running UX workshops

  • http://jennycham.co.uk/?page_id=408

    Info on usability testing

  • http://jennycham.co.uk/?page_id=410

    How to develop personas

  • http://jennycham.co.uk/?page_id=5

    Who is Jenny Cham?

  • http://www.goldencocker.co.uk/

    Who can resist puppy pictures?

  • http://jennycham.co.uk/?page_id=499

    What is card sorting?

Coming out of your shell (aka UX workshops with life scientists)

InfoQ have now put up my talk from UX Cambridge 2011.  The talk was about workshops and how they are a great way to explore ideas for a user-centered design project.

InfoQ page

The talk includes…

  • At what point would a workshop be useful?  And when would it be harmful?
  • Why have user workshops got a bad reputation with some UX practitioners?
  • Examples of the practicalities of planning and delivering successful UX workshops – the aim being to inspire you to run your own workshops right away.
  • I try to share special insights for those of you that work with ‘geeky’ scientific audiences and/or in an international environment.

Enjoy!

Raunchy ad on my Enzyme Portal videos! How rude!

I recently uploaded some tutorial videos to the EBI YouTube channel for Enzyme Portal (one of EBI’s new services, launched this week).  Everything seemed to be going fine.  Camtasia was playing nice and I successfully exported all the video footage and my carefully crafted captions (aka subtitles).

As it should be - the Enzyme Portal homepage

So it was to my surprise that there was a rumour going around the office that Jenny’s new videos featured another albeit more glamorous ‘Jenni’ in the thumbnail ads after the video is played.

 

Basically, once the viewer has watched the first Enzyme Portal intro video, they are presented with some suggested, presumably ‘related’ video clips in thumbnail tiles in the embedded YouTube window.  See for yourself, this ‘Jenni’ has an unusual dress size, shall we say, and an interest in Lamborghinis not ligases!

At the end of the video...spot the odd one out (or should I say two!)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What Cranfield has done for me

Just before Christmas, Cranfield University asked if I would be happy to talk about my time studying there in a promotional video.  I said yes and they have created a sweet (if slightly cringe-worthy on my part) photofilm video, which is now on Youtube.  I think the photofilm approach is cool, and probably not as hard to make as with video footage.

 

Photo from the Cranfield Uni promo video

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Usability of sewing patterns

My first post of the new year is about sewing patterns, but don’t let that put you off, if that’s not your thing.  It’s actually a case study in usability in the real world…

The story

I guess lots of you will have heard of Cath Kidston, the sewing and home-style legend – well I recently had a look at her book ‘Sew!’ .  The book looks great and the photos are brilliant, but I found it virtually impossible to follow the instructions to make the stuff.  When it comes to sewing, CK is right up there; she is the guru – so why was her book such a textiles nightmare?

In contrast, I got another book for Christmas from the little known Rob Merrett with the poetic title ‘Sew it, Stuff it!’.  One of the few male authors I could find in this field, I was very happy to try out some of the stuffed toy projects with total success and joy! (See photos of the stuff I made).  These projects were no less complex than Cath Kidston, involving lots of layers (that’s ‘applique’ in sewing speak), seam allowances and all sorts of sewing fun – so what was the reason for such a great user experience here and not with Cath K’s book?

 

Babuska Basket (from Rob Merrett's book, page 48)

Boo! (from Rob Merrett's book page 46)

The lessons in usability from my sewing pattern books

1. Don’t use jargon.  I found that CK assumed that the reader understands complex sewing-related vocabulary.  For example, “Press a 2.5cm turning at each end of the bias tape, then press it half lengthways with the turnings on the inside“/ “slip stitch“/ “tape channel“- huh?.  RM’s book on the other hand avoided the use of specific sewing terms, or if he did , he qualified them in brackets afterwards.  For example “with right sides together and aligning the raw edges, pin baste (tack), and machine stitch…“  Baste is the proper word, I guess, but it’s easier to guess what ‘tacking’ means.

2. Separate the instructions for a task into bite-size chunks.  CK’s patterns were admittedly split into numbered points, but somehow they were still hard to follow.  The text was fairly small and loads of complicated sewing stuff was encoded in a tiny pieces of text; I guess that’s what techie jargon allows you to do – say something complicated in very few words.  RM’s pattens took up more space on the pages, which meant you could see if something was going to be more involved because there were lots of points to follow.  It seems a bit like expectations were set more appropriately by RM, and the use of white space to make it visually appealing was good too.

 

3. Use diagrams and pictures to illustrate concepts.  CK did not include any ‘in progress’ pictures in her recipes (that’s probably not the official term for these things, but hey it’s like a recipe!).  It showed the finished photo only.  Frustrating – because you could see the end goal, and how nice it was, but no easy way to get there!  There was no way to check visually I was on the right track.  Ok, both CK and RM had information on techniques in a separate section of the book – but this didn’t really help much (for example, I couldn’t get the French Knot right in RM’s book at all!)  What I needed was a set of step-by-step pictures to lead me through the journey.  RM’s book did this perfectly – see some examples below.

 

'How to' diagrams from Rob Merrett's book (Babuska Basket recipe)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'How to' diagrams from Rob Merrett's book (Boo! recipe)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Make it simple and as few steps as possible.  CK’s pattern pull out was huge, unwieldy and complicated – with many overlapping letter and number coded squares.  RM’s patterns were in two separate more manageable pull-outs which were colour-coded and labelled by project name and letter.  The patterns were overlapping, but easy to distinguish.  When a large square was needed for a pattern in ‘Sew it stuff it’, RM just told you the dimensions (in both inches and cm), but when CK’s pattern needed a large square shape you need to find it in the huge pattern pull out.  CK’s recipes have skill levels indicated at the top using a list of thimbles (3 thimbles being harder than one, etc) – but I couldn’t follow just one thimble – so it made me feel rather inadequate!

What have I learnt?

So, I am still left wondering why this all happened.  How could CK let us down – when she has such great high street shops and loyal fan base?  Maybe it is because CK is a sewing pro – so she doesn’t even realise she is using technical descriptions in her ‘recipes’.  The book seems to be aimed at those who have had sewing training, which alienates  readers who may have taught themselves how to sew.  Me thinks she didn’t use design personas to guide her creation of the book!

Anyway this is not a rant or a book reviews post, I just thought it was fun to show you how user experience is everywhere – and can lead the user/customer either loving or hating your product – and only fairly minor tweaks separating the two.

Happy sewing!

 

Oskar the Owl (from Rob Merrett's book page 69)

 

New articles on Card Sorting

Following Caroline Jarrett’s course on ‘Writing for the Web’ I was inspired to reorganise the pages on my site, and write new material on my experience of card sorting.  So as of last week there is more content – and hopefully – more of it is legible.

Have a look at the new Card sorting articles...

I think I have got the hang of breaking up the wall of words, but being ruthless enough to slash half the words, and then another half again…well you can judge for yourselves….

Advanced Simplicity?

Last week I attended Giles Colborne’s talk on ‘Advanced Simplicity’, hosted by the EBI Interfaces Forum at the EBI, Hinxton.  What struck me in particular in his talk was the clear parallel between what he refers to as ‘mainstreamers‘ and ‘experts‘ and the ‘biologists‘ and ‘informaticians‘ that use bioinformatics services at the EBI. People doing wet lab experiments, maybe spending 10-20% of their time at the computer, and dry programmers with 100% of the time on the computer.

Giles Colborne talks about experts and mainstreamers when it comes to understanding 'usability'

The way things break down into two categories sounds simple, but the huge challenge comes when one has to come up with designs for online services that must suit both audiences simultaneously.  One way to do this, Giles suggests, is to hide more complex functionalities, so its only the experts that discover them; he used a hidden sliding panel on a remote control as an example of this in practice. On the flipside then, it means that the major routes into the most frequently accessed services should be made even easier, so the mainstreamers can’t help but find them.

One way to tackle this problem is to make sure we design for – and test solutions with – individuals from both worlds.  Applying realistic scenarios in usability testing can help hugely to understand whether you have achieved the right balance.  I also involve both audiences in initial user research and workshops to make sure the requirements for each are understood.

From my experience, designing for the generalist is harder and more important, because they are much more liable to give up and lose hope of finding what they want.  The investment in energy to find what they are after is greater, because they don’t come there very often.  In contrast, the expert always seems to find a way to get what they want, whether the route to it is clear or not.

Overall, I find it reassuring that people like Giles have struggled, and continue to struggle, with this careful balancing act.  I look forward to reading more from Giles on how I can improve UX for both of these important segments of our audience.

Which of my papers received the most citations?

 

After a year or two, I thought it was time to check on the citations of the papers I wrote during my doctorate.

I used ISI Web of Knowledge to do this – which is a nifty little service.  You add in an author name and it gives you information on the number of citations achieved for each paper by that author.  You can display the results dynamically as bar chart graphs, and can adjust the settings for different displays.  It works best for peer-reviewed journal articles or book chapters, as far as I can tell.  There is a time lag too, as recently published work doesn’t appear in the database immediately.

Interestingly, this search showed that the review papers we wrote on proteomic bioinformatics were the most popular, receiving 21 and 23 citations for the 2007 and 2009 reviews, respectively.  The MRMaid paper, which was published in Molecular Cellular Proteomics (MCP) journal also received 18 citations.  I think it’s usual for reviews to be cited more frequently than research papers.  All round, not too bad…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Writing for the Web Course with Caroline Jarrett

On Friday 25th November, I will be attending Caroline Jarrett’s course on writing for the web, which is being held at the EBI.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t tend to think enough before I write – so I’m hoping after this course I’ll have a neat check list of dos and don’t s, to which I will refer, before I click ‘Publish’.  The result for you, the reader, should be some much better quality postings on this site – and generally a happier experience!

 

 

UX Cambridge 2011

 

 

 

The first ever UX Cambridge conference is taking place on November 10-11th this year and I am thrilled to have been invited to speak at the event. The programme looks packed with interesting stuff, including a speed-sketching workshop session from some of my EBI colleagues (Francis Rowland and Antony Quinn).  My talk is an ‘experience report’ on Friday 11th November at 9.00am.

My talk title: 

Coming out of your shell: using UX workshops to your advantage in a tecchie/scientific setting

Talk abstract: (it does seem strange referring to oneself in the third person, but hey!)

Workshops are a great way to explore ideas for a user-centered design project, but when should you actually plan to have one?  At what point would a workshop be useful?  And when would it be harmful? Why have user workshops got a bad reputation with some UX practitioners?   In this talk, Jenny will answer these questions and provide examples from her own experience of planning and delivering successful UX workshops.  The aim of the talk is to inspire you to run your own workshops and to provide practical tips that will help you get started right away.  Jenny will include examples of workshops for internal design teams and stakeholders, as well as for groups of external users, potential users and clients.  At EMBL-EBI, we specialise in delivering services to scientists and computational biologists all over the world, so Jenny can also offer special insights for those of you that work with ‘geeky’ audiences and/or in an international environment.

 

Bioinformatics PhD opportunity at Cranfield University

Below is an advert for a PhD in bioinformatics with my former PhD supervisor – he is a great guy, highly recommended.

———–

PhD Bioinformatics Opportunity at Cranfield University, UK
We are currently seeking a highly motivated individual to take up a PhD studentship in the Bioinformatics Group at Cranfield University in the UK.
The Project
Developments in analytical technologies are resulting in ever larger amounts of dynamic biological data becoming available, in both the public domain and within individual companies. These data include molecular information from transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics as well as phenotypic information such as that from patient records and clinical trials. This ever increasing mass of data is only useful if relevant biological information can be reliably extracted from it, and it is this challenge that forms the core of this PhD project.
The aim of the PhD will be to apply, evaluate, and further develop Bayesian methods for the extraction of disease-specific biological knowledge from large heterogeneous biological datasets. In recent years Bayesian approaches have been shown to have a number of benefits over traditional “frequentist” statistical approaches. The project will begin with the development of a protocol for information extraction, starting with well understood data and gradually adding more data from different sources to refine and augment the extracted information. Our overall goal is to discover new biological knowledge of relevance to diabetes.
The Skills Required
The project is entirely computer based, so we are looking for someone with excellent computer skills, including proven expertise in programming, data analysis and databases. A good BSc or MSc in Bioinformatics or other data-centric subject is essential. Specific experience of Bayesian methods would be beneficial, but not essential as there will be opportunities to learn about this during the PhD.
About Cranfield Bioinformatics Group
Cranfield Bioinformatics Group was established in 2000 and has since established a track record in the development of algorithms and software for the analysis of large molecular data sets. Our PhD graduates have all gone on to successful careers in bioinformatics, with employers including the European Bioinformatics Institute, the Sanger Institute, GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson & Johnson. You can find out more at about the group at http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/health/bioinformatics.
The Funding
The studentship is sponsored by Sanofi-Aventis. There are no fees to pay, and the student will receive a tax-free stipend of ~£14,000 per year. The project includes a budget for computer equipment and conference travel. Please note that funding is only available to applicants who are already citizens of the European Union. The project duration will be three years, and the project supervisor will be Dr Conrad Bessant.
How to Apply
For more information, or to make an application, please email Dr Bessant, c.bessant@cranfield.ac.uk.