When I was finishing up my undergraduate degree, I worked in call center management for a really cool technology company. It was not the most glamorous job, but I enjoyed it, and I learned something about myself: I love metrics. Not so much a math-lover, I have always recognized the usefulness of statistics. Working in this role allowed exposed me to several different ways to track and report this data. This week’s assignment allowed me to think critically about which quantitative approaches may be most useful in the context of a food company such as Chipotle, and represent this data in a way that would be useful in a usability report.
I chose time-on-task testing, but there were a few I thought were good selections. I wanted to capture (between product versions) which approaches were the most efficient for the user. Admittedly, I made some assumptions. I know that most (Chipotle) users have in mind what they like to eat from the establishment. I went on a company lunch once and was astounded to watch 40 people rattle off exactly what they wanted, each with little nuances. Keeping this in mind, I made efficiency my top priority for testing. I wanted to be able to say, “this design took users less time to use successfully, therefore required less cognition, therefore is a better design”. Sometimes conclusions such as these are hard to draw with only one form of quantitative data. I feel as though the approach I chose was an effective one, especially when looking at the data visually. It’s easy for an executive to understand two pieces of data compared to one another in the form of a chart, and see what is working, and what isn’t.