1 / 21

Assignment 2: Post-Implementation Assessment

Assignment 2: Post-Implementation Assessment. Judy Blostein, Jennifer Hocko, and Bob Lim (Waltham Interactive Design) March 21 st , 2001. What Does This Assessment Include?. Our project team’s overall approach to Project 1 (Jen).

irish
Télécharger la présentation

Assignment 2: Post-Implementation Assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assignment 2: Post-Implementation Assessment Judy Blostein, Jennifer Hocko, and Bob Lim (Waltham Interactive Design) March 21st, 2001

  2. What Does This Assessment Include? • Our project team’s overall approach to Project 1 (Jen). • Our project team’s principal findings and recommendations (Bob). • A critique of our team’s project strategy and tactics - strengths and weaknesses (Judy).

  3. Approach To Project 1 Jennifer Hocko, Project Lead

  4. Approach To Project 1 • Evaluate the Concord Communications, Inc. Web site at http://www.concord.com. • Management solutions for applications, systems & networks in eHealth Suite product.

  5. Approach To Project 1 • Defined visitor persona: • Engineering job candidate with upcoming interview at Concord. • Established visitor goals/business issues: • Candidate to prepare by gathering relevant company, technology, and job position information. • Concord’s Web site must draw the right mixture of players into their community, strengthening the company from the inside out.

  6. Approach To Project 1 • Divided goals into specific tasks: • What specific questions would candidate ask himself & how would he browse for answers? • Constructed evaluation criteria: • Based on information gathering goals. • Team members individually evaluated site, assuming job candidate persona.

  7. Approach To Project 1 • Identified main categories for findings: • Navigation: implied hierarchy or site architecture. • Content: information displayed to visitors, should answer visitor questions. • Consistency in Terminology & Labeling: facilitates the previous two; helps avoid confusion. • Feedback: how the site responds to visitor-initiated actions.

  8. Approach To Project 1 • Consolidated recommendations into: • Tactical: small modifications that enhance usability without requiring a major overhaul or site redesign; quick & easy. • Strategic: integrated as part of larger, longer-term redesign efforts; usability/human factors issues considered at the beginning of project.

  9. Findings & Recommendations Bob Lim, Project Team Member

  10. Findings & Recommendations • General findings: • Information-rich Web site. • Usability could be improved. • Specific findings: • Problems present in all four “findings” categories (navigation, content, consistency, feedback).

  11. Findings & Recommendations • Navigation: • Poor site structure increased time to achieve goals. • Content: • Absent or unnecessary information. • Consistency in Terminology and Labeling: • Poor labeling when referring to other content. • Redundancies. • Feedback: • Home page download/reload time. • Scrolling text.

  12. Findings & Recommendations • Some tactical recommendations: • Consistency in Terminology and Labeling: • “Corporate Mergers” page • “Press Releases” page • Feedback: • Scrolling text

  13. Findings & Recommendations • Key strategic recommendations: • Conduct a user and task analysis. • Invest in a larger Web site redesign effort. • Home page redesign • Internal pages • Site map

  14. Project Management & PEAT Judy Blostein, Project Team Member

  15. Project Management & PEAT • Project work plan: • Strengths: • Tasks and team members • End dates in the schedule • Weaknesses: • Task decomposition • Communication • Staying on schedule

  16. Project Management & PEAT • WBS process: • Strengths: • Agreement of visitor persona • Even distribution of workload • Good plan • Weaknesses: • Narrow Web site evaluation criteria (“findings” categories too broad) • Actual team member contributions varied • Tracking time on task

  17. Project Management & PEAT • Total project cost: • Initial estimate was 124 hours at $100 per person, for a total cost of $12,400. • Actual time on task for all team members was 125.25 hours, for a total cost of $12,525. • We estimated accurately!

  18. Project Management & PEAT • Activities that took longer: • Iterations of research, writing drafts, getting team comments, and revising. • Activities that took less time: • Assigning tasks/responsibilities. • Performing the Web site evaluation.

  19. Project Management & PEAT

  20. Project Management & PEAT • Relevant PEAT question: • “Project core team members are located together when they work on this project.” • Reasons: • Our remote situation. • Shared information verbally and electronically. • Our storage repository.

  21. The End • Questions?

More Related