Product
A mobile museum ticketing app that allows users to order tickets, select date and time of arrival, add special offers and amenities and have a ready-to-access e-ticket for easy check-in.
Role
Conduct interviews, paper and digital wireframes, lo-fi and hi-fi prototypes, conduct usability studies, account for accessibility, and iterating on designs
Duration
March, 2022 – November, 2022
Research Questions
- How long does it take a user to select and order a ticket in the app?
- Are users able to successfully order a ticket that they want?
- What can we learn from the steps users took to order a ticket?
- Are there parts of the ticket ordering process that are confusing?
- Is the payment process easy to use for the customer?
- Is the in-app e-ticket desirable?
What was discovered from the research
The research findings
A usability study was conducted using a low-fidelity prototype. Five participants, ages 40-60, from the middle to high-income brackets, participated in an unmoderated usability study using LookBack. Participants were asked to log in to LookBack and respond to prompts as they interacted with the Figma prototype. Five themes were discovered during the analysis of the data. The study took no more than 8 minutes to complete.
The review of research insights called for revisions to the special exhibits screen and the adding amenities screen. Three recommendations were made:
- Recommendation 1: Redesign the Special Exhibits feature to include more information about the exhibits and how to add this to a user’s cart.
- This area was addressed. The next step will be to test the revised prototype with a different ground of participants.
- Recommendation 2: Refine the Amenities feature to include more information and visual cues on how to add these features to an order.
- This area was addressed. The next step will be to test the revised prototype with a different group of participants.
- Recommendation 3: refine the time slot feature by making it clear to the user how to select a time of entry.
- It was determined that, for now, this section is adequate. The next step will be to see if users in the R2 useability study group react differently to this feature.
Themes from the Analysis
Changes that resulted from the first usability study
Theme #1 Selecting a Ticket
- All Participants were able to add a ticket to their order.
- Most participants were able to select a time and date of entry.
- The use of a calendar and the time slot feature were easy to use.
It was easy to choose the date and entry time.
Changes made to the design:
No changes were made to this part of the design.
Theme #2 Adding Amenities
- 3 out of 5 participants could add additional amenities to their order.
- For some users, it may not be immediately clear how to add items to an order.
- The checked circles to the right of the item description may have caused some confusion with 2 users.
I guessed at this, but I supposed what you wanted was for me to select each item to add to my cart.
Changes made to the design:
- Removed the image at the top of the screen to allow for more space.
- The checkboxes to the right were eliminated.
- Four amenities were added explicitly, with a description for each item.
- A total area was added so users could see the accumulated amount and decide if they wanted the item(s).
Theme #3 Adding Special Exhibits
- 4 out of 5 participants could not add or deny a special exhibit to their order.
- This feature was confusing to the user.
- The issue may be caused by the lack of information provided in the prototype.
I'm lost here. I don't see any special exhibits. I'll go back. Okay, I'll choose 'No, I'm good.' Whoa, that took me to a screen I didn't expect. Did I miss something?
Changes made to the design:
- The large image at the top of the page was eliminated, along with the text box and the two CTA buttons.
- Each special exhibit or collection was added with a select button.
- Each exhibit or collection has a description, and a ‘Learn More’ button that takes the user to a short description about the artist and the exhibit.
- Corresponding descriptions were added to the design.
- The total amount was added so users could decide whether they wanted to add the exhibits.
Theme #4 E-Ticket QR Code Feature
- 5 out of 5 participants were pleased with the e-ticket QR code feature
- This is a feature that all participants said they would use.
- The image’s simplicity and size may be why participants liked this feature.
Juse like an airplane [ticket] there's my e-ticket!
Changes made to the design:
No changes were made to this part of the design.
Theme #5 Checkout Process
- 5 out of 5 participants were pleased with the checkout process.
- The process was easy to use and similar to other familiar apps.
- This was one of this app’s most successful features, perhaps because of the order review process.
I fould this checkout process to be very easy to use.
Changes made to the design:
- The image and the four boxes were removed to allow for more space.
- A simple textbox that details the order was placed in the center of the screen.
- The total was added to the order status page.
Affinity Study
Meet the Users
Goals: To have a full experience and be able to take it all in. I enjoy seeing the connections between art and nature. And, of course, do some shopping in the museum gift shop.
Frustrations: When I'm rushed through an exhibit. I don't like guided tours but I do like to listen to an audio guide on my phone. I'm not one to read all of the descriptions that accompany each piece of art. That gets to be exhausting.
Quote: Anytime I visit a city with I great art museum I try to go. It adds to my travel experience.
Goals: Spend time with his daughter who loves going to the local art museum. He gets to see her every other weekend, so he likes to have a planned outing. Going to the museum with his daughter brings him a lot of joy watching her excited about all the art. It's a way for him to escape and not think about work.
Frustrations: Crowds and too much to read. He likes to take his time and relax while his daughter explores the museum.
Quote: I'm here for my daughter. She loves art and I love her!
Goals: I want to have enough time to explore the museum and take my time. I prefer to have a storytelling experience with a docent. I'm here for the history, so I love exploring the artwork and artists. I love shopping in the gift shop. A good museum should have a great gift shop.
Frustrations: Limited entrance times. Not enough information about the exhibits or artists. Feeling lost in the galleries. Being rushed through the exhibits. limited shopping experience.
Quote: When I visit the museum, I want the full immersive experience.
User Journey Map
Summary of Competitive Analysis
A look at four competitors in the market
Type and Quality of Competitors' Products
The MuseumAnywhere and the Peace Center offer outstanding ticketing services and experiences. Ordering tickets was easy and straightforward. The MuseumAnywhere is a customizable app that allows any ticketed event or venue to create an app to their liking. The simple app allows one to navigate quickly and efficiently from beginning to end. The MET app and the Tiquets app were not as good. The MET app is confusing and tries to do too much with too little. The app is linked to an outdated tourism website with old content and an old look. The Tiqets app is a good idea, but it tries to do too much in too little space.
Competitors Position in the Market
The MuseumAnywhere app and The Peace Center position themselves as leaders in the market. Their app and companion websites are new, fresh, and modern. The apps do one thing well, and that is helping customers purchase tickets to shows and exhibits. The customization of the MuseumAnywhere app is scalable to any market or venue. The Tiqets app is a good idea but is poorly executed. There’s also a trust problem with the app because it’s unclear if
you buy tickets to the museum you want to visit. The MET app isn’t a ticketing app. It’s a tourist website for all the attractions in NYC.
How Competitors Talk About Themselves
MuseumAnywhere– focused on mobile and web solutions for Museums, Science Centers, Art Galleries, Historical Sites, Zoos, Aquariums, etc. Over time we have developed a deep understanding of requirements, reflected in our innovative solutions. The products they develop are customizable to meet the needs of different size museums.
The MET NYC – is one of the most celebrated museums in the world. It is truly an incredible museum. Honestly, based on the information provided in the app, it is unclear how the famous MET museum talks about itself. I would have to go to their webpage, which isn’t linked to the app. This is unfortunate and an oversight of the PR department at The MET.
Tiquets – Opens the doors of culture to those who don’t want to wait in culture’s long lines. You can skip the ticket lines and go to the mobile tickets on your smartphone. It claims to have partnerships with hundreds of museums worldwide.
The Peace Center does not have information about itself anywhere in the app. If I didn’t know this venue, I wouldn’t know anything about it from this app.
Competitors' Strengths, Weaknesses, and Gaps
The top two apps (MuseumAnywhere and The Peace Center) have great ticketing purchasing features that are clear and easy to use. The purchasing process is easy to navigate and edit at any time. Having an e-ticket on your smartphone is a great feature for tourists. The two bottom apps are riddled with too much information. Using an app to buy museum tickets and thus bypass the box office lines may be appealing, but it’s not enough to warrant using an app. It’s a weak rationale. These apps also try to do too much, like hotels, other attractions, bus fares, and so on, clutter the experience. The gaps are:
- Simple to use ticketing app that does one thing well
- Clean design
- Focus on the art and museum and not all the other features or options (too kitchen sink)
Opportunities
- Develop an app specific to the mission and focus of a museum,
- Keep the app up-to-date
- Stay current with appealing UX/UI design
- Ensure the app is accessible to all individuals regardless of ability
Wireframes and Prototypes
Development process from paper to Figma
Lo-Fi Prototype
Iteration of the Design
Based on the feedback from the first usability study and the desire to move to a hi-fi prototype, using the museum branding colors, artwork, typography, and content, a round of changes and design choices were made. The following were issues that arose from the design of the next prototype.
Issue One: Amenities Screen
The image at the top of the screen was removed, allowing for more space at the top of the app. The checkboxes to the right of each item were eliminated. Four specific amenities were added with more detailed information. A total area was added so users could see the accumulated amount for the items added.
Issue Two: Special Exhibits Screen
The image at the top of the screen was removed, along with the text box and two CTA buttons. Specific exhibits were added with a select button. A ‘Learn More’ button was added that takes users to a short description of the artist and exhibition. A total amount was added so users could decide whether to add the exhibit.
Issue Three: Checkout Process
The image and the four boxes were removed to allow for more space. A simple textbox that detailed the order was placed in the center of the screen. Images of accepted credit cards were added to the top of the screen. An improved text entry process was added. Icons for security and CVV code were added.
Issue Four: Calendar and Entry Times
A cleaner calendar was designed to allow the user to select the desired date to visit the museum. Better buttons were created to allow the user to select the desired time of entry.
Hi-Fi Prototype Development
Phase one and two of the hi-fi prototype to final design
The Outcome of the Second Usability Study
The final iteration of the app in the design process
Five participants were asked to complete a second usability study using the final draft of the app prototype. Using an app called UserBrain to facilitate the unmoderated study, the five participants found the app easy to use, compared well to other ticketing ordering apps, and liked the look and feel of the app. The only issue was addressed, and the final app was changed based on this research.
Change to the Design
Based on the feedback from the second usability study, the design of the e-ticket was changed. First, the 5 participants agreed that using a QR code was insufficient. They preferred a bar code. Second, there needed to be more information about how to use the ticket, what would happen if the ticket or device was lost or stolen, and what alternatives would be available if one did not have the e-ticket to present upon entry to the museum. These changes and updates were made to the final screen of the app prototype.
Style Guide
Takeaways
This is my first UX Case Study and portfolio project for the Google UX Design Certification program. Besides learning how to use Figma, develop wireframes, and complete usability studies, I have learned how people approach design and how valuable understanding the user experience is in creating a product. The research part of this process has been the most insightful in that people have shared their likes, dislikes, and challenges with my design.
Knowing what I know now, I would change the look and feel of this app. I selected the app’s focus and artwork based on a recent trip to the MET Museum in NYC. I was spellbound by a special exhibit they had about the Dutch Masters. It was incredible. This led me to the design of this app. I wish I had changed the app to use more contemporary artwork or showcase various artwork. It would also be interesting to develop a children’s museum app.
I have learned so many new things, and I continue to be challenged every day by the enormous array of design software, applications, and techniques available to designers today. There is so much to know and be able to do. It’s sometimes overwhelming. I’ve learned how to use my WordPress theme and website better to build this extensive case study. I’ve gained several new skills in Photoshop, Figma, and Camtasia.
Lastly, I wish the Google Certificate program gave students better access to the online application to facilitate unmoderated usability studies. The first study I conducted using a program called LokkBack. It was a great program, easy to use, and offered many unique features, such as the transcription feature, making it easy to document user feedback and quotes. Unfortunately, that program, while free at first, only allowed for one study with 5 participants. After the trial period, the cost was $38.00 a month. I did not want to accrue an additional cost.
I then switched to a program called UserBrain, which also gave me a trial subscription to one study and 5 participants. This program was confusing and difficult to use. The participants for the second usability study were confused by the application and frustrated with the UI and overall design. It would be helpful if Google could do this free of charge, much like the free student account for Figma.
This project has been a tremendous learning experience for me. I value all the skills and knowledge I have gained from this experience.