Overview

This project is one study in a series of research projects on a product called FastLane Mobile Shopper, also called FLMS. FLMS is a scan-as-you go shopping app produced by NCR. The app allows users to scan items as they shop with their mobile phones and then pay for their products either through their phone or at a self-checkout location. The original test was to include user preference between two designs as well as a usability test on the full process of using the FLMS app from starting a trip to paying on a mobile device. However, due to time constraints in a summer internship and problems getting the app functioning correctly, only the process of starting a trip, adding items, removing items, and user preferences were tested. A moderated test was conducted and found that user preference seemed to be based on personal preference. In addition, some pain points were discovered. Data collected from this evaluation was used to inform and support design decisions.

Research Questions

1. Do users prefer to have a single screen with a list of their scanned items and the scanner, or to have a separate screen for both the scanner and list of scanned items and switch between them?

2. Are there any points in the process of using the FLMS app that create user confusion or friction?

Scope and Constraints

The main focus of the study was on the two scanner screen designs, the new half screen proposed design and existing full screen scanner design. The half screen scanner includes a list of your scanned items and the scanner on the same screen, without the need to switch between scanner view and list view. The full screen design has the scanner in a different view than your list of scanned items and requires the user to switch between views.

The half screen design was made in order to decrease friction points in the user journey. However, the team had received some user feedback indicating that users might not want to use this design because it would drain battery power having the camera on throughout the shopping trip.

Study Design

Participants

• 8 NCR Global Headquarters (GHQ) Employees

• Novice to FLMS

• Candy bars given as incentive for completion of test

Key Findings

After analyzing the video recordings taken of the participants screen, it was decided that the time on task that was recorded would not be used. This was due to multiple instances where the app would glitch resulting in the app to crash. This added extra time to some participants time on task metrics and skewed the data so that it was not usable. However, through analysis of the rest of the data 4 key findings were discovered and are presented below.

1. 5 participants noted that they did not like having to switch back and forth between the scanner and the cart when using the full-screen design.

2. Preference was split 50/50 between the two designs.

3. Confusion regarding the removal of items using the half-screen design. Participants attempted to tap items on scanner screen in order to remove them.

4. The arrow next to the item in the half-screen design seemed to indicate that there would be more information if the item were tapped.

Reflections

What I Learned:

This project was initially slow to start, as the app was not ready to be put onto a device and tested for several weeks. Additionally, the complications involved with multiple UserZoom studies created challenges. Once the testing began, many of the comments participants gave were about the app glitching, rather than the design of the screens. However, there was good feedback given throughout the test. The videos were actually the most helpful because they indicated user confusion around the expected interactions that was not shown in the other metrics. The main objective of this study was to differentiate user preference between the two designs, but the preference was split 50/50. 

What’s Next?

Based on the data gathered in this study, the team decided to implement a setting in the app to let the user decide which scanning screen to use. The next steps in creating a frictionless experience would be to address the additional findings from the study and run a validation usability test. In addition, testing the experience of other similar products that can be used (i.e. a scanner provided by the store) in order to ensure consistency across experiences should be done.