design-protocol 1.0.0

package/skills/dp-research/references/synthesis-methods.md

@@ -0,0 +1,289 @@
+# Synthesis Methods
+
+Turning raw research into actionable insights.
+
+---
+
+## The Synthesis Mindset
+
+**You're not summarizing. You're interpreting.**
+
+| Raw Data | Synthesis |
+|----------|-----------|
+| "3 users couldn't find the export button" | Users expect data actions grouped together, not scattered |
+| "P2 said 'I always copy this to Excel'" | The built-in tools don't support their actual workflow |
+| "5/6 asked about notifications" | Alert management is an unmet need |
+
+Your job: **What does this pattern mean? What should we do about it?**
+
+---
+
+## Step 1: Data Extraction
+
+### From Notes to Atomic Units
+
+Go through all your notes and extract **individual observations** — one insight per sticky note (physical or digital).
+
+**Format:** [Participant] + [Observation/Quote]
+
+Examples:
+- "P1: Clicked 'Reports' first when looking for cargo data"
+- "P3: 'I always have three tabs open to compare vessels'"
+- "P4: Hesitated 10+ seconds at the filter menu"
+- "P2: 'My workaround is exporting to Excel and doing it there'"
+
+**Keep:**
+- Behaviors (what they did)
+- Verbatim quotes (what they said)
+- Emotions (frustration, delight, confusion)
+- Workarounds
+- Expectations (what they thought would happen)
+
+**Don't combine or interpret yet.** Just extract.
+
+---
+
+## Step 2: Affinity Mapping
+
+### Grouping Related Observations
+
+1. **Spread out** all your observations
+2. **Silently group** related items (no labels yet)
+3. **Move things around** — a note can spark regrouping
+4. **Don't force it** — some notes may not fit anywhere
+
+### Naming Clusters
+
+Once groups stabilize:
+1. **Name the theme**, not the content
+   - ❌ "Things people said about search"
+   - ✅ "Search expectations mismatch"
+2. **Use insight language**, not feature language
+   - ❌ "Filter issues"
+   - ✅ "Users need context to filter effectively"
+
+### Finding Hierarchy
+
+- Which themes are biggest? (most notes)
+- Which themes overlap?
+- What's the relationship between themes?
+
+---
+
+## Step 3: Pattern Recognition
+
+### Look For
+
+**Frequency:** How many participants showed this behavior/opinion?
+- "4 of 6 participants struggled with X"
+- "This came up in every interview"
+
+**Intensity:** How strong was the reaction?
+- Mild annoyance vs. complete task failure
+- "It's fine" vs. "I absolutely hate this"
+
+**Consistency:** Is this uniform or are there segments?
+- "Senior traders do X, junior analysts do Y"
+- "Power users have workarounds, new users get stuck"
+
+**Contradictions:** Where do participants disagree?
+- This might indicate different user segments
+- Or context-dependent behavior
+
+### Pattern Documentation
+
+| Pattern | Frequency | Intensity | Notes |
+|---------|-----------|-----------|-------|
+| Users expect search to include cargo | 5/6 | High | Caused task failure in 3 cases |
+| Copy-paste to Excel workaround | 4/6 | Medium | "It's annoying but I'm used to it" |
+| Confusion about vessel status colors | 3/6 | Low | Asked about it but figured it out |
+
+---
+
+## Step 4: From Observations to Insights
+
+### The Three Levels
+
+**Observation** (What happened)
+> "3 of 5 users clicked on the wrong section first when looking for arrival times"
+
+**Insight** (What it means)
+> "Users' mental model of 'arrival information' doesn't match our information architecture"
+
+**Recommendation** (What to do)
+> "Restructure vessel data around user tasks ('When will it arrive?' 'What's it carrying?') rather than data types"
+
+### Insight Formulation
+
+Template:
+> **[User type]** expects/needs/believes **[thing]**, but currently **[gap/friction]**, which causes **[consequence]**.
+
+Examples:
+> **Traders** expect to see all vessel movements on a single screen, but the current design requires switching between three tabs, which causes them to miss time-sensitive changes.
+
+> **Operations managers** believe arrival times should update automatically, but the current refresh model requires manual action, which creates a false sense of having current data.
+
+---
+
+## Step 5: Quantifying Qualitative Data
+
+### Frequency Counts
+
+Always note: "X of Y participants"
+- "4 of 6 participants experienced this"
+- "Mentioned in 5 of 8 interviews"
+
+### Severity Rating
+
+| Severity | Definition | Example |
+|----------|------------|---------|
+| Critical | Blocks task completion, no workaround | Couldn't complete primary task |
+| High | Significant difficulty, poor workaround | Found it eventually but very frustrated |
+| Medium | Notable friction, has workaround | Completed but not ideal |
+| Low | Minor annoyance | Noticed but didn't impact task |
+
+### Confidence Level
+
+| Level | Meaning | Action |
+|-------|---------|--------|
+| High | Consistent across participants | Act on this |
+| Medium | Mixed signals or smaller sample | Consider acting, maybe more research |
+| Low | One or two mentions | Note for future, don't prioritize |
+
+---
+
+## Step 6: Prioritizing Findings
+
+### Impact vs. Frequency Matrix
+
+```
+                High Frequency
+                     │
+         ┌───────────┼───────────┐
+         │ Important │ Critical  │
+ Low     │ (Monitor) │ (Fix Now) │
+ Impact  ├───────────┼───────────┤ High
+         │ Low       │ Important │ Impact
+         │ Priority  │ (Plan)    │
+         └───────────┼───────────┘
+                     │
+                Low Frequency
+```
+
+**Critical:** High impact + High frequency → Fix immediately
+**Important (Plan):** High impact + Low frequency → Schedule soon
+**Important (Monitor):** Low impact + High frequency → Improve when possible
+**Low Priority:** Low impact + Low frequency → Backlog or ignore
+
+---
+
+## Synthesis Output Template
+
+### Finding Format
+
+```markdown
+## Finding [#]: [Theme Name]
+
+**Severity:** Critical / High / Medium / Low
+**Frequency:** X of Y participants
+**Confidence:** High / Medium / Low
+
+### Observation
+What we saw or heard (specific, factual)
+
+### Evidence
+- P1: [quote or behavior]
+- P3: [quote or behavior]
+- Observed in X/Y usability sessions
+
+### Insight
+What this means (interpretation)
+
+### Recommendation
+What to do about it
+
+### Open Questions
+What we still don't know
+```
+
+### Example Finding
+
+```markdown
+## Finding 3: Search Expectations Gap
+
+**Severity:** Critical
+**Frequency:** 5 of 6 participants
+**Confidence:** High
+
+### Observation
+Users typed cargo-related terms (commodity names, bill of lading numbers) into vessel search and expected results.
+
+### Evidence
+- P1: Typed "crude oil" expecting to see vessels carrying crude
+- P2: "I assumed I could search by cargo, that's how I think about it"
+- P4: Searched "BL12345" then said "oh, I guess that's not how it works"
+- Task failure in 3/6 usability sessions
+
+### Insight
+Users' mental model centers on cargo/shipment, not vessel identity. They think: "I need to find my cargo" not "I need to find the vessel my cargo is on."
+
+### Recommendation
+Either: (a) Expand search to include cargo attributes, or (b) Create a separate cargo/shipment search, or (c) Provide clear affordances that direct users to the cargo search path.
+
+### Open Questions
+- Would combined search create confusion for users who DO search by vessel?
+- What's the relative frequency of cargo-first vs. vessel-first mental models?
+```
+
+---
+
+## Common Synthesis Mistakes
+
+| Mistake | Problem | Better Approach |
+|---------|---------|-----------------|
+| Reporting observations without insight | Doesn't guide action | Always add "what this means" |
+| Cherry-picking supportive data | Confirmation bias | Report contradicting evidence too |
+| Over-generalizing from few data points | False confidence | Always note sample size |
+| Recommending solutions too early | Closes options | Separate findings from recommendations |
+| Ignoring outliers | Misses edge cases or segments | Note and explain outliers |
+| Vague insights | Can't act on them | Be specific and concrete |
+
+---
+
+## Tools for Synthesis
+
+### Physical
+- Sticky notes + wall/whiteboard
+- Sharpies (forces conciseness)
+- Dot voting for prioritization
+
+### Digital
+- Miro / FigJam — virtual sticky notes
+- Notion / Airtable — structured database
+- Dovetail — dedicated research repository
+- Simple spreadsheet — observations in rows
+
+### What Works Best
+Honestly? Sticky notes. The physical act of writing and moving things creates better thinking than typing and dragging.
+
+If remote: FigJam or Miro with everyone silent, music playing, moving notes independently before discussing.
+
+---
+
+## Synthesis Session Structure
+
+### Solo Synthesis (~2 hours)
+
+1. **Extract** — Pull all observations into atomic notes (45 min)
+2. **Cluster** — Group silently, no labels (30 min)
+3. **Name** — Label clusters with insight themes (15 min)
+4. **Interpret** — Write insight statements (30 min)
+
+### Team Synthesis Workshop (~3 hours)
+
+1. **Individual extraction** — Everyone reviews notes, writes stickies (30 min, silent)
+2. **Affinity clustering** — Team groups stickies silently (20 min)
+3. **Theme naming** — Discuss and name clusters (30 min)
+4. **Insight generation** — Small groups draft insights (30 min)
+5. **Prioritization** — Impact/frequency mapping (30 min)
+6. **Recommendations** — Discuss implications (30 min)

package/skills/dp-research/references/usability-test-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,260 @@
+# Usability Test Script Template
+
+Copy and customize this template for moderated usability testing.
+
+---
+
+## Usability Test: [Project Name]
+
+**Test Goal:** [What we're evaluating]
+
+**Prototype/Product:** [Link or description]
+
+**Participant Criteria:** [Who we're testing with]
+
+**Duration:** 45-60 minutes
+
+**Materials Needed:**
+- [ ] Prototype/staging environment access
+- [ ] Recording software (screen + audio)
+- [ ] Consent form
+- [ ] Task scenarios (printed or accessible)
+- [ ] Note-taking template with task list
+- [ ] Post-task rating scale
+- [ ] Backup plan if tech fails
+
+---
+
+## Pre-Test Checklist
+
+- [ ] Test prototype on participant's likely device/browser
+- [ ] Clear any personal data from prototype
+- [ ] Prepare realistic test data (names, numbers, scenarios)
+- [ ] Test recording setup
+- [ ] Have prototype URL ready to share
+- [ ] Brief observers (mute, no reactions, take notes)
+
+---
+
+## Test Script
+
+### 1. Introduction (5 minutes)
+
+> "Hi [Name], thanks for helping us today. I'm [Your name], and I'm a designer working on [product/feature].
+>
+> Today I'm going to ask you to try out [something we're building / a prototype]. I want to see how it works for someone like you and find any problems we need to fix.
+>
+> A few important things before we start:
+>
+> **This is a test of the design, not a test of you.** There are no wrong answers. If something is confusing, that's a problem with the design, not with you.
+>
+> **I'd like you to think out loud** as you work. Tell me what you're looking at, what you're thinking, what you expect to happen. This helps me understand your experience. I know it feels a bit unnatural, but it's really valuable.
+>
+> **I may not answer questions right away.** I want to see what you'd do on your own first. I'm not trying to be unhelpful — I just want to see where the design works and where it doesn't.
+>
+> **Please be honest.** You won't hurt my feelings. Critical feedback is the most useful feedback.
+>
+> I'd like to record the screen and our conversation so I can review it later and share clips with my team. The recording won't be shared publicly. Is that okay?
+>
+> Do you have any questions before we start?"
+
+**[Get consent, start recording]**
+
+---
+
+### 2. Background Questions (5 minutes)
+
+*Goal: Understand their context and baseline expectations*
+
+- "Tell me briefly about your role and what you do day-to-day."
+- "How familiar are you with [domain/similar tools]?"
+- "What tools do you currently use for [relevant task]?"
+
+---
+
+### 3. Task Scenarios (30-40 minutes)
+
+*Give one task at a time. Read the scenario, don't explain it.*
+
+---
+
+#### Task 1: [Task Name]
+
+**Scenario:**
+> "[Realistic scenario that describes a goal, not steps. Include context about why they'd be doing this.]"
+
+*Example:*
+> "You're checking on a shipment and need to find out when the vessel 'Nordic Spirit' is expected to arrive in Rotterdam. Please show me how you'd do that."
+
+**Success criteria:**
+- [ ] [What defines completion]
+- [ ] [Any specific steps they must do]
+
+**Observations to note:**
+- Path taken:
+- Errors/wrong turns:
+- Hesitations:
+- Comments:
+- Time:
+
+**Post-task questions:**
+- "On a scale of 1-5, how easy or difficult was that? (1 = very difficult, 5 = very easy)"
+- "What was confusing, if anything?"
+- "What did you expect to happen when you [clicked X]?"
+- "Is that what you expected to find?"
+
+---
+
+#### Task 2: [Task Name]
+
+**Scenario:**
+> "[Scenario]"
+
+**Success criteria:**
+- [ ] [Completion criteria]
+
+**Observations to note:**
+- Path taken:
+- Errors/wrong turns:
+- Hesitations:
+- Comments:
+- Time:
+
+**Post-task questions:**
+- "Difficulty rating (1-5)?"
+- [Task-specific questions]
+
+---
+
+#### Task 3: [Task Name]
+
+**Scenario:**
+> "[Scenario]"
+
+**Success criteria:**
+- [ ] [Completion criteria]
+
+**Observations to note:**
+- Path taken:
+- Errors/wrong turns:
+- Hesitations:
+- Comments:
+- Time:
+
+**Post-task questions:**
+- "Difficulty rating (1-5)?"
+- [Task-specific questions]
+
+---
+
+### 4. Overall Impressions (5-10 minutes)
+
+**General feedback:**
+- "What was your overall impression of this?"
+- "What worked well?"
+- "What was frustrating or confusing?"
+- "What's missing?"
+
+**Comparison:**
+- "How does this compare to [what you use today / competitors]?"
+- "Would this fit into how you work?"
+
+**Specific elements:**
+- "What did you think of [specific feature]?"
+- "Was [terminology] clear?"
+
+**Expectations:**
+- "Is this what you expected [product] to be?"
+- "What would make this more useful for you?"
+
+---
+
+### 5. Wrap-Up (2 minutes)
+
+- "Is there anything else you want to share about your experience?"
+- "Any questions for me?"
+
+> "Thank you so much for your time. Your feedback is really valuable and will help us make this better."
+
+**[Stop recording]**
+
+---
+
+## Note-Taking Template
+
+| Task | Completed? | Difficulty (1-5) | Time | Errors | Key Observations |
+|------|------------|------------------|------|--------|------------------|
+| 1    |            |                  |      |        |                  |
+| 2    |            |                  |      |        |                  |
+| 3    |            |                  |      |        |                  |
+
+**Standout quotes:**
+- 
+
+**Biggest pain points:**
+- 
+
+**Unexpected behaviors:**
+- 
+
+---
+
+## Facilitation Tips
+
+### When They Get Stuck
+
+**Don't immediately help.** Instead:
+- "What are you thinking?"
+- "What would you try next?"
+- "What are you looking for?"
+
+**If truly stuck (2+ minutes):**
+- "Where would you expect to find that?"
+- Give a hint, not the answer
+- Note it as a failure point
+
+### When They Go Off-Track
+
+- Let them explore (might reveal mental model)
+- "I notice you went to [X]. What made you go there?"
+- Gently redirect: "Let's come back to [task goal]"
+
+### When They Ask Questions
+
+- "What do you think?"
+- "What would you expect?"
+- "I'll explain after — for now, just try what you'd normally do"
+
+### When They Apologize or Get Frustrated
+
+- "This is exactly the kind of thing we need to find"
+- "If this is confusing, that's a problem we need to fix"
+- "You're doing great — this feedback is really helpful"
+
+---
+
+## Task Scenario Examples
+
+**Good:**
+> "A colleague asks you to check the cargo details for the 'Maersk Valencia.' Find this information and tell them what it's carrying."
+
+**Bad:**
+> "Click on Search, type 'Maersk Valencia', and look at the cargo tab."
+
+**Good:**
+> "You need to set up an alert so you know when any vessel arrives in Singapore. Create this alert."
+
+**Bad:**
+> "Test the alert creation feature and give feedback."
+
+---
+
+## Post-Test Debrief
+
+Immediately after each session:
+
+1. **What worked?** (features, flows that were clear)
+2. **What failed?** (tasks not completed, major confusion)
+3. **What surprised you?** (unexpected behavior or comments)
+4. **Top 3 issues** from this session
+5. **Quotes to highlight**