1. Usability and UX at the
University of Liverpool
Jeff Woods
University of Liverpool Library
2. Will be looking at:
• Why did we do it
• How did we do it
• What did we learn
• Where to next
Usability study
3. Began early 2015
Cross-Library project group formed
• Academic Liaison
• Content, Collections and Delivery
• Customer Services
• Systems
Initial focus on EDS branded locally as ‘DISCOVER’
Usability study
4. “to make informed, evidence based changes to our main resource
discovery platforms, improving their usability and effectiveness, and
therefore the Library service and student experience, in line with
objectives identified in Library’s strategic plan”
• How and to what extent our users were engaging with these
platforms
• How easy, efficient and effective they found it to locate and
access content
• If it met their information needs
• What they liked and disliked
We wanted to find out:
Why?
5. 3 stage approach
• Survey
• Usability test sessions
• Focus group discussions
Philip, M. (2010) Do students want a one-stop-shop to help them navigate their way around the maze
of library resources? A usability study looking at the beta version of Summon, the new library search
engine at the University of Huddersfield. M.A. University of Sheffield.
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/9824/
McManamon, C. and Smith, S. (2014). Library Search: survey, usability study and focus group report.
Manchester Metropolitan University.
https://www.academia.edu/28313928/Library_Search_survey_usability_study_and_focus_group_report
How?
6. How?
1. Survey
Survey
• QuickTap survey app
• Library staff with iPads roaming library social areas
• Pop-up Library event
• Online version (“soft launch”)
7. How?
1. Survey
Analysis
• 719 responses (1 every 3 minutes!)
• Healthy representation of wider n
• Free text comments coded and categorised
• Excel based dashboard
• Post survey staff de-briefing session
8. How?
2. Usability sessions
Semi-structured search tasks
• Task 1 – researching a topic
• Task 2 – searching for specific, known items
• Task 3 – researching a topic using an alternate version of ‘DISCOVER’
• 5 sessions, 20 participants in total
9. How?
2. Usability sessions
Observation checklist:
Systematically recorded the occurrence of particular, pre-defined
search techniques and the use of specific features, facets and
functionality
Anything else of interest
10. How?
3. Focus Groups
• Followed usability sessions
• Participants asked to reflect upon their typical information
seeking behaviour both during the test sessions and in a wider,
everyday context
• PGR facilitators
11. • Experimented with different approaches to survey
• Twitter poll
• “Coffee and Chat” format
• Link to survey from OPAC
• Focus group discussions but no usability test sessions
How?
OPAC review
12. What?
Lessons learned:
• Survey approaches
• Recruitment woes
• Focus group facilitation
• Challenging assumptions – branding & awareness and need
for open mind
• Technical knowledge within the team
13. Where to next?
• Need for iterative review
• Responsive to the developing and changing needs of users
• Applying ethnographic approaches to UX
• different user groups
• online content and spaces
• Determine and develop methodology
• diaries
• cognitive mapping
• semi-structured interviews
14. More information:
Woods, J (2014). Discover: Survey, Usability Testing and Focus
Group Report. University of Liverpool.
http://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/3003105/
Woods, J., Gillespie, E. & McManamon, C., (2016). Discovering
discovery: lessons learnt from a usability study at the University of
Liverpool. Insights. 29(3), pp.258–265. DOI:
http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.320
