MS2 6 Brainstorming process and solutions - ISIS3510-Group-27/Documentation GitHub Wiki

6. Brainstorming process

As a team, we developed a brainstorming session using a collaborative Miro whiteboard. This whiteboard became our main space to explore possible solutions for the problems identified during the research phase.

The process was divided into two main stages: diverge and converge.

In the divergent phase, each team member proposed ideas freely. The goal was to generate as many possible solutions as possible without judging them at first. We used sticky notes to write ideas for different problem areas, including campus navigation, parking lots, student organizations, and food or restaurant discovery.

After that, we moved into the convergent phase. In this stage, we reviewed the ideas, grouped similar ones, and started comparing them based on usefulness, feasibility, and connection to the user problems. This helped us move from a broad set of ideas to a smaller group of more relevant solutions.

Inputs used

The brainstorming process was based on the research evidence collected before generating solutions. The main inputs were:

  • Interviews with students about their experiences navigating campus, finding classrooms, discovering study spaces, eating on campus, joining student groups, and commuting by car.
  • Customer journey maps that helped us understand the steps, emotions, pain points, and moments of truth in each user experience.
  • Key findings from the interviews, especially moments where students faced uncertainty, lack of information, or dependence on informal solutions.
  • Problem situations derived from the research, including:
    • Difficulty finding classrooms, buildings, and campus spaces.
    • Lack of visibility for student organizations and informal communities.
    • Uncertainty about parking availability and waiting times.
    • Limited access to clear information about food options, menus, prices, and schedules.

Solutions generated

During the brainstorming session, the team generated several possible solutions. These included:

  • An interactive campus app where students can search for classrooms, buildings, and useful campus spaces.
  • A detailed campus map showing buildings, administrative offices, and relevant facilities.
  • Personalized recommendations for study spaces, food, coffee, and campus locations.
  • A section for the university gastronomic offer, including menus, prices, opening hours, promotions, and allergy restrictions.
  • A system for ordering and picking up food on campus.
  • User ratings and reviews for restaurants, campus spaces, and services.
  • Parking lot information, including estimated time to park, live updates, availability, prices, and line status.
  • A tool to help students reduce traffic-related uncertainty and arrive on time.
  • A section for registered student organizations, including requirements, deadlines, events, reminders, and information about how to join.
  • A feature to help students find clubs or communities related to their interests.
  • Institutional support information, such as recommendations from university offices or student representatives.

Selection criteria

To compare and prioritize the solutions, the team used several criteria.

First, we evaluated how directly each idea responded to the pain points found in the interviews and journey maps. Ideas that addressed repeated or high-friction problems were considered more valuable, especially when they helped students reduce uncertainty or avoid depending only on informal information.

Second, we considered feasibility. Solutions that could realistically be implemented as part of a digital platform, such as maps, search tools, reminders, schedules, and information cards, were prioritized over ideas that required complex infrastructure or major institutional changes.

Third, we considered user impact. We prioritized ideas that could help students make better decisions earlier, save time, reduce stress, and access useful information before arriving at a place or committing to a plan.

Finally, we organized the ideas using categories similar to a prioritization matrix:

  • Rationale Choice: useful and feasible features that directly solve important problems.
  • Delight: features that improve the experience and add extra value for users.
  • Darling: attractive ideas that could be valuable but are more specific or secondary.
  • Long Shot: interesting ideas that are harder to implement or less central to the main problem.

Based on this process, the team prioritized solutions that combine usefulness, feasibility, and a strong connection to the research findings. The most relevant direction was a centralized platform that helps students discover campus resources, navigate the university, access reliable information, and make better decisions.