Three User-Driven Innovation Methods for Co-Creating Cloud Services

Ting-Ray Chang & Eija Kaasinen

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

Interact, Sept. 7, 2011, Lisbon

Cloud Software program

2 08/09/2011

Agenda of the presentation

Introduction: Cloud Services & Open Telco

Motivations & some initial decisions

Method one: Focus group ideation

Method two: Online Crowdsourcing in Open Web Lab (Owela)

Method three: Direct Interaction at the Open Innovation Showroom

(Ihme)

Examples of user ideations and acceptance comments toward privacy

Q & A

3 08/09/2011

Introduction: cloud services & Open Telco

Cloud Software: installable applications web-based computing, somewhat a new idea for everyday end-users

Open Telco: Open API framework for mobile networks, aim to develop services utilizing users’ data via tele-operators

Creating value proposals within the project partners

Expertise from the project group: technical,

business, designers, researchers, etc.

9 value proposals

Outcome illustrated initial scenarios

Technical possibilities services users

actually want

4 08/09/2011

User Driven Innovation & Co-Creation

User-Driven Innovation [Holmquist, L.(2004)] :

Users considered as a source of inspiration that can foster innovation.

Co-creation: With USERS, designers/researchers gain insights in idea generations to create services

Co-design: User role is an equal design partner which enables the designers and users make design decisions together

Participatory design: multi-stakeholders work together in different stages of design practices

5 08/09/2011

Motivations & some initial decisions

Cloud computing, what could it be for our end-users?

To involve users in early design processes

To gather different levels of insights from the end-users, from the values of the services to specific interactions and user experiences

Different types of user-involvement: real-world versus lab setting, face-to-face versus online interaction, synchronized versus unsynchronized ideation

Resource dependent

Quantitative versus qualitative analysis in goal-oriented research

6 08/09/2011

Focus group ideation

Established user study method

Goal: feedback on acceptance and ideation of proposed value proposals

8 participants, 4F+4M, invited and scheduled, user lab setting, one hour.

Introduce value proposals with illustrated scenarios, comments and group discussions. Followed by group ideations of future TV

Lists of ideas and comments were produced, many consensus were reached

7 08/09/2011

Online Crowdsourcing in Open Web Lab (Owela)

84 Users from around the world invited to participate the online ideation

Users ideated free from time and space restrictions

Researcher participation for motivating and monitoring ideation and discussions

Large amount of data (221 threaded comments), crazy ideas, deep feelings, and vivid stories

More tech-oriented user groups

8 08/09/2011

An example of user ideations of future TV

9 08/09/2011

Direct Interaction at the Open Innovation Showroom (Ihme)

Ihme: bring user research to the users’ world, in a living lab (in Finnish Ihme also means miracle)

Other new technology to try and experience (e.g. eye-ware-free 3D-TV)

Semi-structured discussions between researchers, designers and users

20 – 45 mins per session, 26 participants in first two weeks

Users of all types could participate in & out freely, attracted “everyday” user groups

Pro: Designers/researchers in users’ shoes, co-create tangible UX

Challenge: recruit & motivate participation, flexible schedule

10 08/09/2011

examples of user ideations of future TV and M2M

11 08/09/2011

Some acceptance comments toward privacy in all studies

@Focus group:

‘yes I think it can be a problem.’

‘yeah I also worry.’

@Ihme:

‘It [peer recommendation services] feels like being tracked when you are on the road and everyone will make the same choices.’

‘If it [universal profile] follows me everywhere, it is like a chip in my dog...’

@Owela:

‘there are going to be serious privacy issues though, so this would definitely need to be an opt-in service so people don’t get upset.’

‘I think I would be a bit worried about who gets access to my information and possible misuse issues.’

‘It seems obvious to me that this information cannot possibly be kept private. It already bugs me that my car can be tracked as I cross bridges or toll points.’

12 08/09/2011

Comparisons of three studies

Focus group Owela Ihme Length of the study 1 hour 1 month 3 weeks

No. of users involved 8 participants 84 online users, 49 M + 35 F 26 users

Procedure BriefingIdeation Discussion

Briefing Ideation+Discussion

Briefing Ideation+Discussion

Study duration 1 hour 4 weeks 20~40 min per user, 3wks

Value proposals 4 (4, 5 and 6, 7) 5 (1, 2, 3 and 6, 7) 5 (1, 2, 3 and 6, 7)

Environment Laboratory Real world Real world

Illustration material PowerPoint, video clips of scenarios

Screen shots of scenarios PowerPoint, video clips of scenarios

Media Face to face Online Face to face

Data gathering Notes and post-its Online forum Interview notes & post-its

No. of comments 63 221 252

Data from Scen. 1-3 Acceptance comments + 5 new* ideas

Acceptance comments + 20 new* ideas

Questionnaire data (19 questions)

Different categories of ideas – future TV

4 12 13

Different categories of ideas – M2M

5 12 5

Group/individual discussions

Group Group Individual

User participation, scheduled versus free

Scheduled Free Free

13 08/09/2011

Take-away

For our project:

value proposals evaluated and further developed into cloud services, ex. Group text chat, “why? I already have it on my phone..”

Deep understanding of the end-users

Ideation and evaluation with lead users and everyday users

For researchers and designers:

Focus group was the most efficient method for producing quick ideas and feedback;

Owela online co-creation gave most creative ideas; and

Ihme direct interaction in a living lab creates the most close-to-real-life-experience (tangible) ideas.

Other things to consider: resource, recruiting and motivating users

14 08/09/2011

For further interests

To find out more about User-driven innovation and TAMM (Technology Acceptance Model for Mobile Services), see:

http://www.vtt.fi/people/eija_kaasinen.jsp?lang=en

Cloud Software Program:

http://www.cloudsoftwareprogram.org

Further questions or to get the PPT from this presentation:

Find ”Ting-Ray Chang” on LinkedIn, or (DesignResearcher)

http://www.linkedin.com/in/designresearcher

15 08/09/2011

VTT creates business

from technology