Goal: “Discover users feedback about the current UI and identify problems and potentials to treat in the new design guideline“
Content
Personas Overview:
The following list provides an overview of all user personas in openIMIS. All information in the personas are 100% made up and generated. The following details from the User manual were used to generate the personas: https://openimis.atlassian.net/wiki/x/4wAA2
Role | Name | Location | Age | Background | Goals | Challenges |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Enrolment Officer | Fatima Mwanga | Tanzania | 32 | Social sciences, 5 years in health | Maximize enrolment, improve community awareness | Tech access in remote areas, language barriers |
Clerk | Ramesh Gurung | Nepal | 28 | Office management diploma, 4 years | Maintain accurate records, streamline processing | Application backlog, changing regulations |
Accountant | Jean-Paul Ngome | Cameroon | 40 | Accounting degree, 10 years experience | Accurate financial records, timely reporting | Data reconciliation, resource limitations |
Receptionist | Aisha Thapa | Nepal | 35 | Healthcare management degree, 6 years | Ensure patient access to claim forms, facilitate claims process | High patient volume, ensuring accurate info |
Claim Administrator | Ramesh Gurung | Nepal | 28 | Office management diploma, 4 years | Timely claims submission, improve provider communication | High volume claims, tracking claims status |
Medical Officer | Dr. Lila Acharya | Nepal | 45 | Medical degree, 15 years experience | Ensure claim accuracy, enhance collaboration | Inconsistent info, tight deadlines |
Scheme Administrator | Pascal Nguene | Cameroon | 38 | Public administration degree, 8 years | Smooth scheme operation, provide accurate data | Cumbersome management, data accuracy |
openIMIS Administrator | Sara Mbuyu | Tanzania | 30 | IT background, 5 years in admin | Ensure data security, maintain system reliability | Disruptive updates, user access control |
Personas Details:
User Survey:
Goal: “Measure the usability of openIMIS and find treatable problems in the UI/UX”
Survey: https://forms.office.com/e/puhURXFd0h
Measure the Usability:
To measure the usability we will use the well known System Usability Scale (SUS). We will focus on the all-positive scale from Kortum, P., Acemyan, C. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2021) rather then the original from Brooke, J. (1986). By asking the related 10 Questions we can get quite fast a measured score.
We will use SUS over Usability Metric for User Experience (UMUX) cause we can get a little more in-depth feedback from users.
Item | Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree | |
---|---|---|
1 | I think that I would like to use this system frequently. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
2 | I found this system to be simple. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
3 | I thought the system was easy to use. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
4 | I think I could use this system without the support of a technical person. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
5 | I found the various functions in this system were well integrated. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
6 | I thought there a lot of consistency in this system. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
7 | I would imagine that most people would learn to use this system very quickly. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
8 | I found the system very intuitive. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
9 | I felt very confident using the system. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
10 | I could use the system without having to learn anything new. | 1 2 3 4 5 |
To put that score into a intuitive labeling we will use the one from Bangor, Kortum, & Miller (2009):
SUS Score Range | Adjective |
---|---|
85.59 – 100.00 | Best imaginable |
72.76 – 85.58 | Excellent |
52.02 – 72.75 | Good |
39.18 – 52.01 | OK |
25.01 – 39.17 | Poor |
0.00 – 25.00 | Worst imaginable |
Sources: https://testscience.org/measuring-usability/
Find treatable problems
By knowing the usability score we already can derive some information. But to better know where exactly the users problem with UI and UX are, we will add more openIMIS related open & closed questions. We should consider to not ask to many so that the churn rate will not be to high.
Accessibility
Devices
Features and Functions
Data operations
Notifications
Open Feedback Question
Heuristics Evaluation:
For the evaluation of the user experience as well as the user interface, we are going to use Nielsens 10 heuristics. (https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/2821575 ).
The evaluation will focus on the following features of openIMIS:
Findings
Finding ID | Module | Finding Description | Severity Level | Evidence/Observations | Impact on User Experience | Recommendation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
001 | Multiple | Date-Picker info missing for birthday input field / photo date in add insuree. | minor | https://m3.material.io/components/date-pickers/accessibility#83faa6ed-e2a2-4959-bec6-bb4bb5f52747 - “The calendar icon is the exclusive entry point for the date picker. This improves efficiency for a screen reader and other keyboard users, as it makes interaction with the date picker optional and reduces the amount of key presses required to input a date.” | The user does not know intuitively where to enter a date or where to click to enter the date. For dates which are more then one or two years before the current date, it is complex to navigate in the picker modal. |
https://m3.material.io/components/date-pickers/guidelines#76fda9a2-9563-4054-92fd-513db508cd33 |
002 | Insurees/Policy | Search existing insuree as head of Family does not respond in a reasonable time. No Spinner or Search button + No information if nothing was found. | Moderate | Does not comply with the “Visibility Heuristic” from Nielsen. Its mentioned “Communicate clearly to users what the system’s state is” as well as “Present feedback to the user as quickly as possible (ideally, immediately).” | The user does not know if the search is working or not. Furthermore, its not possible to recognize what the search triggers. Additionally, the user needs to double-click the suggested insuree. |
|
003 | Multiple | After selecting save button the screen does not change. It just turns gray. | Major | Does not comply with the “Visibility Heuristic” from Nielsen. Its mentioned “Communicate clearly to users what the system’s state is” as well as “Present feedback to the user as quickly as possible (ideally, immediately).” | Users are confused if the operation they did was successful or not. Usability testing as well as the survey suggested, that the notification bar is not observed by the user. Hence, the user needs to check by themselves if their operation was successful or not. |
|
004 | All | Reload button as well as reload page has no warning if you really want to reload. By hitting the button accidentally, all inserted data gets lost. | Moderate | Does not comply with the “User Control Heuristc” from Nielsen. As its known that users do perform actions by mistake it should be possible to give them a “emergency exit” to leave the unwanted action. | User needs to retype all inserted data. |
|
005 | Multiple | If a entry is deleted in the list, it will be displayed as gray stripped row. The list itself will not get refreshed afterwards. | Major | Does not comply with the “Visibility Heuristic” from Nielsen. Its mentioned “Communicate clearly to users what the system’s state is” as well as “Present feedback to the user as quickly as possible (ideally, immediately).” | User does not know whether the operation was successful or not. He needs to do an additional click to refresh the list and search for the record. |
|
006 | Multiple | Only some small amount of input-fields are needed but a lot more input-fields are shown on several forms (e.g. Add Family | Moderate | Does not comply with the “Aesthetic and Minimalist Design Heuristic” from Nielsen. “User interfaces should be simplified as much as possible, since | Possibility to misunderstand an input-field is much higher. Also the frustration of a user increases. The required fields are not that easy to recognize anymore thats why the user will need more time to fill out the form. |
|
007 | ||||||
008 | ||||||
009 |