00112 20150321 Usability Testing Recipe for Success - AngryQA/blog GitHub Wiki

Usability Testing: Recipe for Success

AngryQA | 2015-03-21 ํ† ์š”์ผ ์˜คํ›„ 11:38 | QA/ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋ก  | ์›๋ณธ

ํŽŒ : http://www.testingstandards.co.uk/usability_recipe_for_success.htm 

์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ ๊ด€๋ จ ์ž๋ฃŒ

์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ๋Š” ๋น„๊ธฐ๋Šฅ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ๋กœ 

์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž์˜ ํ•™์Šต๊ณผ ์ œํ’ˆ์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ํŽธ๋ฆฌ์„ฑ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ์ž…๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

์•„๋ž˜ ์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ๋ณด๋ฉด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜๊ณ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค(?)

์‚ฌ์‹ค ์˜์–ด๋ผ.. ๋Œ€์ถฉ ์ œ๊ฐ€ ๋ณด๊ณ ์‹ถ์€๊ฑฐ๋งŒ ๋ดค์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค :(

line_characters_in_love-16 

์ž์„ธํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์€ ์œ„ ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ ์ฐธ์กฐํ•ด์ฃผ์„ธ์š”~ : D

์ด๊ฑฐ ๊ด€๋ จํ•ด์„œ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ์ผ€์ด์Šค ์ž‘์„ฑํ•˜๊ณ , ์˜คํ† ์ž‡์œผ๋กœ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜๋Š” ํˆด ๋งŒ๋“ค๋ฉด ์ƒ๋‹นํžˆ ์œ ์šฉํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•ด๋ณด์ž…๋‹ˆ๋‹ค~:D

Use Case Study: The Pick โ€˜n Pay Group

Company: The Pick 'n Pay Group, one of Africa's largest and most consistently successful retailers of food, clothing and general merchandise for the past three decades

Project Leader: Test and Data Services, a leading South African software testing company

**Project: **The system tested was Pick โ€˜n Payโ€™s core Enterprise Resource Planning application.

**Project Objectives: **The main project objectives were:

ยท         to estimate current user data entry efficiency

ยท         to make design recommendations to increase user data entry efficiency

 

 **Techniques Used: **Tasks were reviewed in terms of data entry efficiency using the Keystroke Level Model (Card et al., 1980). This method is used to predict the time an expert user would take to complete a task on a user interface. Time estimates are attained by breaking down tasks into sub-units called operators. There are seven main types of operators possible when a user performs any task (see Table II). These predictions are based on a study involving extensive tests with users.

 

|

Operator

|

Definition

|

Time (seconds)

| |

Keying

|

Time to press a key

|

0.12

| |

Pointing

|

Time to move the input device to a target.

|

1.10

| |

Homing

|

Time to change between mouse and keyboard.

|

0.40

| |

Drawing

|

Time to draw a line using an input device.

|

1.06

| |

Clicking a button

|

Time to click the input device.

|

0.20

| |

Mental processing

|

Time to perform mental processing.

|

1.35

| |

System response

|

Time the system takes to respond.

|

?

|

Table II. The operators and estimated times used in the Keystroke Level Model (Card et al., 1980)

In this project, two frequently performed tasks were analyzed. The results from the analysis of one of these tasks (โ€œCapturing an Orderโ€) are detailed below. This task is performed in a manual receiving environment after goods have been received at the delivery area and a hard copy of the order with its invoice has been manually written. The capturing clerk then captures the order onto the system and specifies, among other details, what goods were received, in what quantity they were received and when they were received.

Outcomes

Data Entry Method 1: Current design โ€“ using mainly the mouse

This analysis estimates how long it would take an expert user to capture an order while using the current system design which mainly uses the mouse for data entry. Table III shows the summarized calculation. The total estimated task execution time is 71.81 seconds.

|

Operator

|

Number of times

|

Time (seconds)

| |

Keying

|

63

|

63 X 0.12 = 7.56

| |

Pointing

|

23

|

23 X 1.10 = 25.30

| |

Homing

|

28

|

28 X 0.40 = 11.20

| |

Clicking a button

|

24

|

24 X 0.20 = 4.80

| |

Mental Processing

|

17

|

17 X 1.35 = 22.95

| |

TOTAL TIME

|

71.81

|

Table III. The operators and estimated time for capturing an order using the current interface design and mainly the mouse for data entry

_ _

Data Entry Method 2: Improved design โ€“ using only the keyboard

The second analysis estimates how long it would take an expert user to capture an order while using an improved system design that uses solely the keyboard for data entry. From the summarized results in Table IV, it can be seen that the total task time is 33.15 seconds. This is less than half of the time it takes to perform the identical task using mainly the mouse (71.81 seconds).

|

Operator

|

Number of times

|

Time (seconds)

| |

Keying

|

85

|

85 X 0.12 = 10.20

| |

Pointing

|

0

|

| |

Homing

|

0

|

| |

Clicking Button

|

0

|

| |

Mental Processing

|

17

|

17 X 1.35 = 22.95

| |

TOTAL TIME

|

33.15

|

Table IV. The operators and estimated time for capturing an order using an improved interface design requiring use of only the keyboard

 To illustrate the organizational impact of improving task efficiency, one can estimate the amount of working time taken when performing different forms of data entry. According to in-house company statistics, an average store captures about 450 orders per store per month. Figure 2 shows the estimates for the amount of hours per month the different types of data entry would take. From these results, one can see that by performing a few simple usability design improvements to the interface stores have the potential to improve order capturing efficiency by 56%.

| | | | |

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2. Estimated hours per month per store spent capturing orders using different data entry methods

Comments

๋งจ๋‚  ๋ง์”€ํ•˜์‹œ๋˜ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋™์ž‘๊นŒ์ง€์˜ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋‹จ์ถ•,์Šคํƒญ ๊ฐ์†Œ๊ฐ€

์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ• ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๋‚ด์šฉ ๋งž์ฃ ?

๋นˆ์Šค์œค Beenbyoon | 2015-03-22 ์ผ์š”์ผ ์˜คํ›„ 9:27

--

๋„ค

์ผ์›๋™ ๋„ˆ๊ตฌ๋ฆฌ | 2015-03-22 ์ผ์š”์ผ ์˜คํ›„ 9:28

--