Peer-Graded Assignment:

Reflection – Mind-Mapping

Javier Hernandez

Challenge

In early 2006, I was part of a team charged with developing a mobile solution to  enhance the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (AIR PODS) patient family experience.   Senior management had given us this general task, but specified nothing more.  It  was our job, therefore, to determine exactly what patient families wanted and  needed in a mobile solution (if they needed anything at all), and from that  compile a set of user stories for developing a solution.

Selection

As the team’s business analyst, it was my job to capture the project’s  requirements and define the solution.  We knew that any approach would have to  be intuitive, stable, easy to learn, and carry AIR PODS branding elements.  But beyond  that, the team could only make assumptions.

To dig deeper, I applied a compressed version of the design sprint methodology  popularized by Google (www.gv.com/sprint), as it would allow us to quickly  capture a lot of information about the needs and concerns of patient families. A  key element of this approach is mind mapping, which, as Maria Hernandez stated  in the Mind Mapping Tool video, helps identify “patterns and insights from the  large quantity of data you’ve collected during your exploration of What Is.”

Application

I began assembling patient family personas from two different perspectives:   those of the AIR PODS staff, who interact with a variety of patients daily, and those of  the patients themselves.

To capture the AIR PODS staff’s input, I scheduled interviews with senior leaders  involved in patient care to glean their insights about patients and families.  To  explore the patient families’ perspectives, I approached the hospital’s Family

Advisory Council (FAC), a group of patient families that meets monthly to advise  AIR PODS senior leadership on issues and concerns of families.  I was able to use two  of their meetings to conduct workshops that would feature personas,  brainstorming and prototyping exercises.  The persona and brainstorming  exercises used mind-mapping principles.

In the workshop, I asked the FAC members to create personas around patients,  parents and AIR PODS staff – not only to create models of these roles, but to  understand how the patient families saw them.  Using empathy maps for patients,  parents and AIR PODS staff, the participants filled in what they thought those  individuals might think, see, hear, feel, say and do.

Next, I conducted the brainstorming session, asking the group to list the  challenges they experienced while visiting AIR PODS.  I steered them away from  thinking about technologies and had them focus solely on “pain points.”   Participants had a time limit for writing thoughts on sticky notes and placing them  on poster paper, much as they had done with the personas; then, each participant  was given a strip of sticky dots to use to “vote” on the thoughts.  Participants  could give a thought as many “votes” as they wanted, but when they used up  their allotment of dots, they were done voting.  I compiled the results and ranked  the highest-ranked ideas, converting them into user stories.

In a second session, I divided the participants into groups and provided drawing  materials and paper templates of phone screens.  I asked them to design screens  for their ideal mobile app.  The results were a collection of extremely low-fidelity  prototypes that allowed us to understand user expectations for an app.

Insight

The personas painted a picture of a harried, stressful experience, regardless of  how pleasant and seamless AIR PODS tried to make it.  Patients – being children --  were frightened and unsure of what to expect.  Parents, primarily worried about  their children, were stressed and confused about where to go, especially if they  were not familiar with Philadelphia or our locations.  AIR PODS staff were viewed as  compassionate but very busy.

The brainstorming yielded similar results; it was clear that patient families needed  tools to organize their visits, get directions, and ask questions without having to  bother staff.  Interviews with CHOP staff confirmed that patient-facing staff  agreed with and understood the patient families’ struggles.

The prototyping exercise produced a variety of designs that emphasized simplicity  and the ability to address basic questions.

Approach

The persona and brainstorming tools were highly effective in building an  understanding of the patient families’ needs and concerns without focusing on a  technical solution.  Through that feedback, we had a clearer understanding of the  families’ mindsets and how the solution would have to meet those needs.  The  “dot voting” portion of the exercise let the participants prioritize their own  feedback, making it easy for us to prioritize the user stories later in the project.   The FAC meetings provided a “safe space” for patient families to express their  ideas, while the anonymity of the process allowed everyone to be “heard”  without being dominated by one or two individuals.

The prototyping helped the FAC participants feel engaged in the process and gave  us a sense of what they expected in an app.  However, the exercise could have  been improved by adding more structure, or pairing up FAC participants with  more tech-savvy designers who could act as coaches.


Peer - Graded Assignment : Reflection – Mind - Mapping Javier Hernandez Challenge In early 2006 , I was part of a team charged with developing a mobile solution to enhance the Children ’s Hospital of Philadelphia ( AIR PODS ) patient family experience . Senior management had given us this general task , but specified nothing more . It was our job , therefore , to determine exactly what patient families wanted and needed in a mobile solution ( if they needed anything at all ) , and from that compile a set of user stories for developing a solution . Selection As the team ’s business analyst , it was my job to capture the project ’s requirements and define the solution . We knew that any approach would have to be intuitive , stable , easy to learn , and carry AIR PODS branding elements . But beyond that , the team could only make assumptions . To dig deeper , I applied a compressed version of the design sprint methodology popularized by Google ( www.gv.com/sprint ) , as it would allow us to quickly capture a lot of information about the needs and concerns of patient families . A key element of this approach is mind mapping , which , as Maria Hernandez stated in the Mind Mapping Tool video , helps identify “ patterns and insights from the large quantity of data you ’ve collected during your exploration of What Is . ” Application I began assembling patient family personas from two different perspectives : those of the AIR PODS staff , who interact with a variety of patients daily , and those of the patients themselves . To capture the AIR PODS staff ’s input , I scheduled interviews with senior leaders involved in patient care to glean their insights about patients and families . To explore the patient families ’ perspectives , I approached the hospital ’s Family Advisory Council ( FAC ) , a group of patient families that meets monthly to advise AIR PODS senior leadership on issues and concerns of families . I was able to use two of their meetings to conduct workshops that would feature personas , brainstorming and prototyping exercises . The persona and brainstorming exercises used mind - mapping principles . In the workshop , I asked the FAC members to create personas around patients , parents and AIR PODS staff – not only to create models of these roles , but to understand how the patient families saw them . Using empathy maps for patients , parents and AIR PODS staff , the participants filled in what they thought those individuals might think , see , hear , feel , say and do . Next , I conducted the brainstorming session , asking the group to list the challenges they experienced while visiting AIR PODS . I steered them away from thinking about technologies and had them focus solely on “ pain points . ” Participants had a time limit for writing thoughts on sticky notes and placing them on poster paper , much as they had done with the personas ; then , each participant was given a strip of sticky dots to use to “ vote ” on the thoughts . Participants could give a thought as many “ votes ” as they wanted , but when they used up their allotment of dots , they were done voting . I compiled the results and ranked the highest - ranked ideas , converting them into user stories . In a second session , I divided the participants into groups and provided drawing materials and paper templates of phone screens . I asked them to design screens for their ideal mobile app . The results were a collection of extremely low - fidelity prototypes that allowed us to understand user expectations for an app . Insight The personas painted a picture of a harried , stressful experience , regardless of how pleasant and seamless AIR PODS tried to make it . Patients – being children -- were frightened and unsure of what to expect . Parents , primarily worried about their children , were stressed and confused about where to go , especially if they were not familiar with Philadelphia or our locations . AIR PODS staff were viewed as compassionate but very busy . The brainstorming yielded similar results ; it was clear that patient families needed tools to organize their visits , get directions , and ask questions without having to bother staff . Interviews with CHOP staff confirmed that patient - facing staff agreed with and understood the patient families ’ struggles . The prototyping exercise produced a variety of designs that emphasized simplicity and the ability to address basic questions . Approach The persona and brainstorming tools were highly effective in building an understanding of the patient families ’ needs and concerns without focusing on a technical solution . Through that feedback , we had a clearer understanding of the families ’ mindsets and how the solution would have to meet those needs . The “ dot voting ” portion of the exercise let the participants prioritize their own feedback , making it easy for us to prioritize the user stories later in the project . The FAC meetings provided a “ safe space ” for patient families to express their ideas , while the anonymity of the process allowed everyone to be “ heard ” without being dominated by one or two individuals . The prototyping helped the FAC participants feel engaged in the process and gave us a sense of what they expected in an app . However , the exercise could have been improved by adding more structure , or pairing up FAC participants with more tech - savvy designers who could act as coaches .