Decision Process - G33-Moviles-2026-1/Wiki GitHub Wiki

Decision Process to Select the Mobile App Idea

1) Divergence: Collecting and Expanding Ideas (Brainstorming)

We started with a divergent phase to generate as many ideas as possible without judging feasibility. Using the “Yes, and…” technique from class, each team member proposed features and needs related to the problem of finding available spaces on campus. This helped us quickly expand from a basic idea (knowing which rooms are empty) into multiple angles: reliability through reporting, room details (capacity/outlets/projector), filtering by location, schedule-based suggestions, sharing, favorites, and reservations.

2) Convergence: Organizing and Reducing Options

After generating the list, we moved into a convergent phase by clustering the ideas into themes:

  • Availability + reliability (real-time free rooms, user reporting)
  • Room suitability (capacity, wifi, type of desks)
  • Personalization (schedule upload, favorites, history)
  • Convenience (filters, proximity recommendations, sharing/reservations)

This step reduced many scattered ideas into a small number of coherent solution directions.

3) Evidence-Based Selection Using the Interview

To choose one idea for the semester, we compared the clusters against what we learned from the problem-validation interview. The interview highlighted that:

  • The user loses time and motivation when she cannot find a suitable space.
  • Peak-hour long gaps increase the severity of the problem.
  • “Free” is not enough; the space must be comfortable and functional (table, comfort, quiet, Wi-Fi, desks).
  • The need includes both studying and resting, and current options are overcrowded.

Based on this evidence, we selected the idea that best addresses the most frequent and impactful pain point: a mobile solution focused on helping students quickly identify suitable available spaces between classes.

4) Final Convergence: Why This Idea Was Chosen for the Semester

We chose this idea because it:

  • Targets a high-frequency campus situation (gaps between classes).
  • Addresses a clear impact (time wasted, reduced motivation, stress).
  • Matches the user’s real criteria for “usable spaces” (not just availability).
  • Has a scope that is feasible for a semester project while still offering room for iteration (MVP first, then improvements like personalization and reporting).

In summary, we applied a diverge → cluster → validate → converge process, using the class brainstorming method to generate options and the interview findings to converge on the idea with the strongest problem evidence and semester feasibility.