SalesApp Improvements Mind Mapping

Peer Graded Assignment: Mind Mapping  Design Thinking for Innovation ­ Week 5 Assignment 31/08/2016

Challenge

I work as software architect, developing and maintaining applications for inside our company. Finding ways  to improve for efficiency of use/time by our associates is not an easy task for these mature applications.  The initial framing for this work is “How do we boost this application efficiency?”, which historically has  involved getting a few key people (e.g. 4) from different business areas together for a meeting to talk about  the application and making suggestions. Rarely is this method very productive or insightful.    My challenge was to get some useful insight for the application (we’ll call it “SalesApp” for simplicity) to  generate real actionable options to take to the improvement planning stage of development ­ or in Design  Thinking terms, going from the “What is” to “What if” phase.

Selection

The Mind Mapping tool (Week 3 ­ Mind Mapping Tool video) was what I choose to use as (from doing this  course) I could identify two critical areas of neglect in the traditional way our company tackled the  application improvement task, and that Design Thinking could address.

1. Not enough input data and poor quality data (only a small section of application users).

2. Not enough minds (plural) thinking about the data and making connections to the actual  issues/reality.

Mind Mapping seemed to be an appropriate tool to help solve this due to it’s ability to get from the surface  type statements (e.g. issues wrong with SalesApp) to the underlying insight type statements to give a better  understanding to generation actionable options for the next stage (improvement options).

Application

Note: I’m not senior management and had limited ability to make changes to methods/traditions. My version  of Mind Mapping had to be a cut down version, but still holding the essence of the method.    I’ll firstly explain the data collection as Mind Mapping relies heavily on having a lot of good data. I used a  diary method; I gave each SalesApp user (10 people) a small notebook with the title “SalesApp ideas &  comments” written in thick pen to keep on their desk and enter any thoughts/ideas/criticisms they had of  SalesApp. I used a physical notebook (not a spreadsheet or online form) as that was a mental reminder  about SalesApp, even when their computer was not on or SalesApp open. After 3 days, I collected the  notebooks and used the data as the basis for the Mind Mapping exercise. I’m happy to say there were a lot  more data from that short time from a wider range of users than we’ve had from our traditional meetings.    Using this data and employing the Mind Mapping techniques:

● I photocopied larger versions of the notebook pages, thus keeping as close as possible to the  original data (i.e. not using my words but theirs), and put them up for viewing on a meeting room  wall.

● We had the usual meeting with the usual key people from the different business areas as well as 4  other users who are not normally involved but know the SalesApp well, so more diverse viewpoints  were able to be utilised.

● Sticky­notes were used to capture thoughts/statements as people quietly reviewed the data.

● Using the meeting room whiteboard, people took turns to share their “sticky­note statements” and  each in turn were able to add their own like relevant/relational stick­note statements. Creating  clusters of similar statements on the whiteboard.

● We then, as a group, tried to turn the clusters of statements into insights (e.g. “slow reports” to “too  much unnecessary reporting”) by discussing the relationships of single cluster groups and clusters  to each other. I took extra notes on verbal statements/insights during the meeting to capture those.

● At the end of the meeting, I collated the statements and insights generated for the basis of next  phase of planning for development.

The actual Mind Mapping method with the data laid out in full view meant people didn’t have to expel  mental energy on the where or why of the data, they could just to take in and think about. The initial quiet  (non­verbal / non­group) reflection of the data enabled people to follow their train of thought without  interruptions (from others) or have their thoughts steered in directions that were not purely their own (by  others). Which maximised the number and individual authenticity of insights generated, proving a very  successful outcome.

Insight

The insight gained from the Mind Mapping tool was greater in both quantity and quality than our tradition  methods. Via the clustering and connections of data/statements, links were made to underlying issues and  gave better direction to the problems that really need to be solved through a better understanding of what  the current situation really is ­ the “What Is”.    An example of problems that the SalesApp data highlighted was “too slow”, “report confusing” and  “irrelevant report  information”, was able to generate the insight of “don’t try to do too much” (bigger is better  right? Not in this case!). The ‘What Is’ insight was “too much information”. This was a succinct distillation of  the data.    Looking at these issues/problems individually (as in the traditional method), we would have solutions  focused on faster servers, redesign of user­interface and reformat reporting information. All of which would  cost more, take more time to develop, AND not sufficiently address the ‘real’ issue.     The Mind Mapping process works and, I dare say, the Design Thinking process will likewise work. I look  forward to implementing more Design Thinking processes into my software development work.

Approach

In future, I’d like to approach this trying some differing elements and perspectives:

● I’d have a longer timeframe to collect a more visual array of data such as screenshots or user  flow/thought drawings, so that the data is more diverse and the visual aspect could capture data not  best represented in words. As more quality data can give a better understanding of What Is.

● I’d have a more diverse group of people doing the Mind Mapping to try capture some of the outlier  statements/insights that could be missing and prove of real value.

These changes I believe would give us the full potential of Mind Mapping tool as used in this example as I  employed/tested it.


SalesApp Improvements Mind Mapping Peer Graded Assignment : Mind Mapping Design Thinking for Innovation ­ Week 5 Assignment 31/08/2016 Challenge I work as software architect , developing and maintaining applications for inside our company . Finding ways to improve for efficiency of use / time by our associates is not an easy task for these mature applications . The initial framing for this work is “ How do we boost this application efficiency ? ” , which historically has involved getting a few key people ( e.g. 4 ) from different business areas together for a meeting to talk about the application and making suggestions . Rarely is this method very productive or insightful . My challenge was to get some useful insight for the application ( we ’ll call it “ SalesApp ” for simplicity ) to generate real actionable options to take to the improvement planning stage of development ­ or in Design Thinking terms , going from the “ What is ” to “ What if ” phase . Selection The Mind Mapping tool ( Week 3 ­ Mind Mapping Tool video ) was what I choose to use as ( from doing this course ) I could identify two critical areas of neglect in the traditional way our company tackled the application improvement task , and that Design Thinking could address . 1 . Not enough input data and poor quality data ( only a small section of application users ) . 2 . Not enough minds ( plural ) thinking about the data and making connections to the actual issues / reality . Mind Mapping seemed to be an appropriate tool to help solve this due to it ’s ability to get from the surface type statements ( e.g. issues wrong with SalesApp ) to the underlying insight type statements to give a better understanding to generation actionable options for the next stage ( improvement options ) . Application Note : I ’m not senior management and had limited ability to make changes to methods / traditions . My version of Mind Mapping had to be a cut down version , but still holding the essence of the method . I ’ll firstly explain the data collection as Mind Mapping relies heavily on having a lot of good data . I used a diary method; I gave each SalesApp user ( 10 people ) a small notebook with the title “ SalesApp ideas & comments ” written in thick pen to keep on their desk and enter any thoughts / ideas / criticisms they had of SalesApp . I used a physical notebook ( not a spreadsheet or online form ) as that was a mental reminder about SalesApp , even when their computer was not on or SalesApp open . After 3 days , I collected the notebooks and used the data as the basis for the Mind Mapping exercise . I ’m happy to say there were a lot more data from that short time from a wider range of users than we ’ve had from our traditional meetings . Using this data and employing the Mind Mapping techniques : ● I photocopied larger versions of the notebook pages , thus keeping as close as possible to the original data ( i.e. not using my words but theirs ) , and put them up for viewing on a meeting room wall . ● We had the usual meeting with the usual key people from the different business areas as well as 4 other users who are not normally involved but know the SalesApp well , so more diverse viewpoints were able to be utilised . ● Sticky­notes were used to capture thoughts / statements as people quietly reviewed the data . ● Using the meeting room whiteboard , people took turns to share their “ sticky­note statements ” and each in turn were able to add their own like relevant / relational stick­note statements . Creating clusters of similar statements on the whiteboard . ● We then , as a group , tried to turn the clusters of statements into insights ( e.g. “ slow reports ” to “ too much unnecessary reporting ” ) by discussing the relationships of single cluster groups and clusters to each other . I took extra notes on verbal statements / insights during the meeting to capture those . ● At the end of the meeting , I collated the statements and insights generated for the basis of next phase of planning for development . The actual Mind Mapping method with the data laid out in full view meant people did n’t have to expel mental energy on the where or why of the data , they could just to take in and think about . The initial quiet ( non­verbal / non­group ) reflection of the data enabled people to follow their train of thought without interruptions ( from others ) or have their thoughts steered in directions that were not purely their own ( by others ) . Which maximised the number and individual authenticity of insights generated , proving a very successful outcome . Insight The insight gained from the Mind Mapping tool was greater in both quantity and quality than our tradition methods . Via the clustering and connections of data / statements , links were made to underlying issues and gave better direction to the problems that really need to be solved through a better understanding of what the current situation really is ­ the “ What Is ” . An example of problems that the SalesApp data highlighted was “ too slow ” , “ report confusing ” and “ irrelevant report information ” , was able to generate the insight of “ do n’t try to do too much ” ( bigger is better right ? Not in this case ! ) . The ‘ What Is ’ insight was “ too much information ” . This was a succinct distillation of the data . Looking at these issues / problems individually ( as in the traditional method ) , we would have solutions focused on faster servers , redesign of user­interface and reformat reporting information . All of which would cost more , take more time to develop , AND not sufficiently address the ‘ real ’ issue . The Mind Mapping process works and , I dare say , the Design Thinking process will likewise work . I look forward to implementing more Design Thinking processes into my software development work . Approach In future , I ’d like to approach this trying some differing elements and perspectives : ● I ’d have a longer timeframe to collect a more visual array of data such as screenshots or user flow / thought drawings , so that the data is more diverse and the visual aspect could capture data not best represented in words . As more quality data can give a better understanding of What Is . ● I ’d have a more diverse group of people doing the Mind Mapping to try capture some of the outlier statements / insights that could be missing and prove of real value . These changes I believe would give us the full potential of Mind Mapping tool as used in this example as I employed / tested it .