After a successful first round of user-studies, I chose to shift my focus for the second round away from the design audience, and invited my colleague Kelvin Ho to participate. Kelvin received his MBA from UCLA, is the Executive Director of My Own Business Inc., and is a Board Member of the Social Enterprise Alliance.
Because it is in a designer’s nature to think in the speculative realm, I was not surprised that my initial series of user-studies did in fact produce these kinds of results. I became curious if these outcomes could be replicated across disciplines, taking it into the business world itself. A bit to my surprise, I found that, while the results were still interesting, the imaginative qualities produced by the designers in the first round of user-studies were not replicated. Regardless, the study lead me to a series of discoveries that will greatly influence a second prototype of the decks.
The following are a list of changes that I will be exploring in the second prototype, which is currently underway:
- Re-frame “horizon element” as “opportunity.”
- Eliminate point system / competitive aspect. While this may be re-introduced, the system as it is does not work, and is not desired.
- “Opportunity” deck should not include opportunities that already exist, but instead focus on concepts with more layers of interpretation.
- “Scenario” deck should not include “transformation,” but instead should include more instances of collapse or constraint.
- Make the user independent. The cards each require explanation – this should not be the case, as the system will eventually require an independent understanding from the participants.
- Initial framing of the system needs work. How much time should be spent? How many people should work together? One-on-one is not the only option.
Diegetic Business 