IKEA Self Scanning Area Re-design by haoyung

Chapter x Redesign IKEA self-checkout redesign Group B1 Phase 3

Table of Contents Phase 1 Analysis

1.1 The product 1.2 Usage Evaluation 1.3 Problem Statement & Design Target

5 22 34

Phase 2 Redesign Explorations 2.1 Ideation 2.2 Concepts 2.3 User Testa 2.4 Analysis

41 45 58 64

Phase 3 Redesign 3.1 Redesign Proposal 3.2 Usage Inspection 3.3 Prototype

81 99 103

Phase 4 Evaluation 4.1 User Test Set Up 4.2 User Test Result 4.3 Final Redesign

113 121 131

Appendice Appendice Phase 1 Appendice Phase 2 Appendice Phase 3 Appendice Phase 4

143 159 167 185

Phase 1

Analysis

This report will discuss and outline of the process taken by the B1 team for phase 2 of the UXAD course. The report will provide an overview of initial redesign ideas based on UI targets, the development of three concept directions, concept testing setup, testing results and finally a conclusion converging these concepts to determine a final proposed concept direction for further development for the remainder of the course.

Introduction phase 1 - Analysis The first phase of this redesign project consists of an analysis of the self-checkout in IKEA and its context. Firstly, the purpose of the product is analyzed and the functions are mapped. We will then examine the physical and digital user interface of the product. After that the context will be discussed by looking at the layout and the checkout ecosystem. Subsequently we will look at the product in use and the issues that are found, which is done based on interviews, observations and a usage inspection. At the end of this chapter the insights of this research will be used to formulate a design problem statement, which leads to our design goal and corresponding redesign targets.

1.1 The product In this chapter the product functions and characteristics are examined, as well as the self-checkout ecosystem. The product characteristics are examined in detail. The chapter is concluded by a product walkthrough and four user profiles.

1.1.1 Purpose of the self-checkout Pros & cons By observing, informal interviews with customers and shopping assistants and trying the product ourselves, an overview of the functions of the self-checkout is created. This overview can be seen in Fig.1.1 and is further explained below. These functions can later be used as requirements for the redesign.

Compared to a regular cash desk, less employees are needed to staff the self-checkouts making it financially interesting for IKEA. Having the smaller checkout stations in store is more space efficient than the regular cash desk checkout, therefore allowing more users to go through the checkout process in less time.

Functions

However, the risk of theft increases with added autonomy for customers. There is also a decrease in human touch, making the service more impersonal or mechanical in nature.

The two main functions of the checkout station are the scanning of products and facilitating a payment option to the user. Other functions aiding the checkout process are providing packing space to the user, printing receipts that allow for exiting the checkout area, displaying feedback on the scanning process such as the product list and identifying family cards and vouchers. During the redesign phase we will have to ensure that these core functionalities are present in the product or made redundant by new functions if omitted. Pros & cons

Fig. 1.1 overview of the functions of the self-checkout 7

1.1.2 Self-checkout ecosystem The self-checkout process has multiple factors that play a role and thus influence the interactions with the product. During our analyses we mainly focused on the people interacting with the product, and found many secondary products used in the interactions. These factors, derived from observational research (see Appendix 1-1), are mapped out in Fig.1.2. Other stores that use self-scan checkouts usually only handle small products, whereas IKEAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s products range from small clothing pegs to whole furniture sets in flat packs. IKEA caters to the masses but is also a very family oriented store. Designing to accommodate for such a variety in product size and audience will be a big challenge. Secondary users of the system are the ikea employees, including the helping staff and the security guards.

Fig. 1.2 factors present in the self-checkout ecosystem

1.1.3 Layout payment area IKEA created three possible routes for the store checkout, as shown in Fig.1.3: 1. The self-scan check-out. Since October 2017 the Delft store changed the entry for this to a single line, that ends in two self-checkout stations, with six selfcheckout stations each. These stations are managed by a set of employees, who guide and help the customers during check-out. 2. The store exit, where customers can pass the checkouts if they decide to buy nothing 3. The cashier-checkout, which has an open structure, allowing customers to form single lines for the different checkout stations.

Fig. 1.3 General layout of self-checkouts and queueing at the end of the IKEA store in Delft

1.1.4 The self-checkout station The product system can be divided into physical components and a digital interface.

Physical Components The physical elements of the product system can be broken down into 10 different parts. These are shown in Fig.1.4 and explained on the next page.

3 2 8 4

Fig. 1.4 Physical components in IKEA self-checkout 12

Unpacking area/station Physical Unpacking area/station consists of a flat area and a hook for users to place the handle of their shopping bag so it can remain open to make the unpacking process more convenient. Screen The screen consists of several interfaces that aim to visually guide the users on how to use the system, displays the language options, displays the name, product code, price of each item, total bill and payment options. Screen Card slider slot Allows the user to place their debit/credit card in the slot and swipe for payment or Swipe their gift card/ IKEA family card for discount on their purchased items. Allows till assistants to reset the tills with their employee card in the case of the user encountering a problem. Receipt printer Prints the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s receipt and partially tears it so it can be removed from the printer.

Hand scanner Allows user to scan the barcodes on their desired items in order to purchase them. This is achieved by pressing the trigger button with their index finger. When triggered a beep is heard to indicate that an item has been successfully scanned. Applies to both items that fit in shopping bags and large items that may be placed on a cart. Card Payment Terminal Allows users to pay for their goods using their debit/credit cards, gift cards via non-contactless or inserting card in designated slot and entering a pin code using the numerical keypad. And the stop(red), correct (yellow) & Okay (green) buttons. Service lamps These are activated when the user or the machine encounters a problem to till managers that they are in need of assistance. Packing area/station Consists of a flat area and a hook for users to place the handle of their shopping bag so it can remain open to make the unpacking process more convenient.

Digital interface The digital interface consists of various screens. In this and the following pages the most important screens are discussed. Welcome screen Guides the user how to use the self-scanners and gives them the option of choosing their preferred language for their transaction (Dutch, German, English or French). They can then press the start button to begin the process.

Consent screen An announcement appears on screen to notify the user about the presence of surveillance camera in the area, and that they are subject to a random spot check if necessary. Press ok to agree with terms.

Scanning screen The transaction screen displays instructions on how to use the handheld scanner, a scanned product list, void button, order number button, manually enter barcode function, language options (on bottom) and a finish & pay button to finalise the transaction.

All items scanned screen This screen acts as reassurance for users to ensure that all their items are scanned correctly. The screen displays two options to this question. Selecting yes will forward them to the next screen while selecting no will bring them back to the transaction screen. The number of scanned items are displayed on the bottom left of the screen so the user can count through their products prior to making a selection. IKEA family/ IKEA Business screen This screen presents the opportunity for users to avail of discounts by scanning their card with the handheld scanner or sliding their card through the card reader on the side of the screen. Both these actions are demonstrated in a visual on screen. A no button is provided for users who subscribers to these services. A help button is displayed in the bottom right corner of the screen.

Transaction screen Displays 4 different payment options for the user to choose from : Bankcard, IKEA family voucher, refund/gift card and other payment. The number of items and costs are directly displayed below the payment options.

Payment screen The screen guides the user through the payment process of using the card terminal through visuals. The total number of products and the bill is displayed directly below the visual. A red cancel button is provided in the event that the user decides to not go through with the transaction.

Receipt print screen The print receipt screen indicates to the user that their receipt is in the process of being printed.

End screen This appears when the user successfully completes the transaction. A thank you message appears and the users are indicated to keep their receipt in the event that they need to return something.

1.1.5 Product walkthrough The product walkthorugh, displayed on the next pages (see Fig.1.5), shows all the main steps from the checkout process in a chronological order to create a detailed overview of actions users undertake. Interactions of the user with the product can be divided into four main phases: starting, scanning, payment and packaging/ leaving. Interactions take place both with a physical and a digital interface, the majority of these interactions following a very linear process. The scanning phase has most variations in its usage, offering options to void items and call for checkout assistance from employees in the process. A full analysis of the state flow can be seen in appendix 1-2 where actions with the product are mapped in a flowchart. These phases will later serve as a basis for the overarching structure of the checkout process in further design steps and to improve communication and referencing about stages the users are in.

Fig. 1.5 A walktrough through the use of the self-checkout 18

1.1.6 Persona’s Observations and interviews were conducted to gain new insights about the user behaviour at the self-checkout. From this research, user profiles were created to map out the various users of this store. These user profiles were then condensed into so-called persona’s, a tool which enables a design team to cater their design to a

specific imagined person that represents an entire user group. We decided to take the user’s checkout experience as the main categorisation for the profiles because this influences the process the most. These persona’s will serve as a guidance for the team during designing and decision making.

1.2 Usage Evaluation In this chapter the usage issues and causes and the research behind it are presented. After a quick overview of the research setup, the main insights are shown. Next the research methods of how these insights came about are further detailed.

1.2.1 Usage research Research overview To initiate the design process, we started exploring the context of use. The primary aim here was to gain valuable insights on the user experience and the current state of affairs at the location. Different types of research were done to gain these insights, these mainly consisted of observations and interviews. An overview of this can be seen in Fig.1.6 below. These insights were combined to form conclusions and used as input for the usage evaluation and storyboard.

Fig. 1.6 Research overview 23

First experience testing To get a more detailed view on the process of the self-checkout we used one of our design team members as our participant. This member had never used the IKEA self-checkout before, and allowed us to find problems that new users experience in the process. The process was observed and documented by other team members, while the participant used the thinking aloud method. Afterwards we also had a short interview to cover any other fronts that we missed during the research. Finally we held a discussion with all team members on the experience with the self-checkout in IKEA. A short overview of the insights is shown in Fig.1.7. For a more detailed description, see Appendix 1-6.

Fig. 1.7 Insights from group membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; first self-checkout

Interview with IKEA stakeholder In order to get more insights about IKEA’s opinion on the current design and on the future of IKEA, a generative interview with stakeholder Aniko Levardy was held(see Fig. 1.8). Aniko works for IKEA at the after sales department and is part of an multidisciplinary team in customer relations. The interview was done face to face at the IKEA store in Delft. It consisted of open questions, a discussion about relevant topics and a generative session. During the generative session we used a set of images to evoke discussion about the checkout process. Main insights • Payment is a very precise and strict area of sales. There are no compromises in this, it either works or it doesn’t and therefore it is vital that it works effectively. It has to be a quick and seamless experience. • Human touch is important when you deal with people every day, you want to make sure that people who visit will get value for their time spent at IKEA. You want to give a good last impression, making people leave with a smile. Ensuring a lasting impression will bring you returning customers. • Some keywords for the desired interaction would be genuine, non-stressful, relaxing, positive. • There is no limitation to the future possibilities, especially with such a diverse crowd of customers shopping at IKEA. The store changes as the customers change, and should always be well thought out. • Right now the greatest strength of IKEA is still its physical stores and original products. If IKEA would no longer be a story I could envision it as a showroom or entertainment centre. (see Appendix 1-8 for all the raw data of the interview with stakeholder)

Fig. 1.8 Interview with stakeholder Aniko Levardy

Observation To gain general insights about the interaction between the users and the self-checkout we conducted observations at the IKEA store. The persona’s shown in chapter 1.1.6 are used to bundle the insights. Main insights The experienced couple • They just directly put their products down on the platforms • Teamwork • Sometimes forgot to press ‘start’ before scanning The semi-experienced family • Parents are usually in a multi-task mode: doing the self-checkout and taking care of the kids. • Children age 6+ are willing to help parents to scan the products and the receipt. • Families with children under 4 would rather choose traditional check-out counter. The occasional self-scanner • Have trouble with scanning big items. • Easy to get nervous. • Difficult to reach for the receipt when have their hands stuffed with products.

Inexperienced senior customer • They enter the area with the shopping attendants’ guidance. • They confirm the list of products on screen after scanning an item. • Senior couple do the self-checkout together.

Usage inspection Chosen method The chosen method for a usage inspection was a heuristic evaluation. It is primarily used for assessing the digital interface as it’s cheap and efficient. Furthermore we expected it to provide more insights than a cognitive walkthrough, because we already conducted a short version of the latter one as ‘First experience test’. We applied the heuristics of Nielsen (1992), which are outlined as follows below: • • • • • • • • •

Simple and natural dialog Speak the user’s language Minimize user memory load Be consistent Provide feedback Provide clearly marked exits Provide shortcuts Good error messages Prevent errors

Procedure and setup Four team members participated as evaluators in the usage inspection. The scenario they would focus on would begin from the moment a user decides to join the queue for the self checkout to the moment they finally scan their receipt to leave the self checkout area. The evaluators kept the user profiles in mind for the inspection to account for problems they may encounter during the process. The user profiles utilized are as follows: Elderly couple, Family and an individual shopper.

The tasks the evaluators had to perform were quite general as not to provide any sort of guidance for the inspection. The general tasks were as follows: 1. Getting to a self checkout. 2. Buying your products (A) Scan Products (B) Pay for products (C) Pack products 3. Leave the self scan area. The evaluators recorded the tasks recording sheets, rated them with an emoji representing their experience ( :) = Good, :| = partial, :( = bad), and then stated the heuristics that they felt were violated at that certain task. Recording sheets were then compiled, discussed amongst the team and analyzed to extract, compile the main insights to add to other data obtained from previous research. See Appendix 1-4 for raw data of usage inspection.

Outcomes It was apparent that there was no heuristic that wasn’t violated, with an average of 5.44 violations per heuristic. The spider chart on the next page (Fig.1.9) indicates the scale at which every heuristic has been violated on a scale from 1 to 9, (1 not being not violated and 9 being badly violated) and the heuristics accompanied by tasks that were indicated as violated. The main problems to arise from the inspection were as follows: • No proper indication of a free till • Activating the till with preferred language option • Language screen does no provide selection feedback • Visual demonstration on scanning page not obvious as some users do not press button to scan. • The font size for checking the bill on screen is too small to read • Payment process is too long. • Not realizing that receipt must be scanned to leave checkout area.

Fig. 1.9 Spider diagram of heuristic violations 29

1.2.2 Usage evaluation Main insights & explanation The insights from the research on the use of the selfcheckout of the previous chapter are combined in the following main insights and a scenario of use. These form the basis of the problem statement, design goal and design targets.

The conducted research was focused around the checkout area from the moment people choose an exit type, until they leave the self-checkout. The insights found were subdivided into the different stages of the checkout process. From this six main insight categories were identified, which were grouped and shown in the Fig.1.10 on the next page.

Fig. 1.10 Main insights and explanations derived from combined research insights

1.2.3 Scenario of use The scenario of use is a visual representation of the actions that users undertake during their use process. Although there will always be slight variations due to the diverse user group that IKEA deals with on a daily basis, it

gives a good overview of general behaviour patterns. The scenario is coupled with shots of the digital interface that the users interact with. It is shown in Fig.1.11 on this and the following page.

Fig. 1.11 The scenario of use

1.3 Problem statement & design target In this chapter the usage issues and causes and the research behind it are presented. After a quick overview of the research setup, the main insights are shown. Next the research methods of how these insights came about are further detailed.

1.3.1 Problem statement From the main insights stated in chapter 3 the following problem statement is created:

Users are directed through an inflexible and overcomplicated process, which does not prevent them from making mistakes but rather judges them. Aspects • Directed and inflexible refer to the dominant way the machine acts. • Overcomplicated refers to the presence of redundant steps. • Does not prevent refers to the non-pro-active attitiude of the interfaces. • Judges refers to forcing users into getting help from a shopping attendant. The problem statement serves as a reference point that clarifies the focus area for the design team.

1.3.2 Design goal and targets Design goal The design goal that answers this problem is defined as:

The interaction between the user and the self-checkout should feel simple and fluent, making the user feel supported and guided through the process.

Design targets Boilded down from 5 design targets(see Appendix 1-9) into two main design targets, these design targets together cover all faces of the problem statement. The design targets have many sub targets because the processes involved vary greatly depending on the different users. Design target 1: The scanning process should be intuitive and easy to understand. Corresponding requirements: • Users should not need to ask employees to better understand the scanning process • Users should know during every step what is expected from them • Users should not encounter any of the current number of redundant steps during the use of the self-checkout • Scanning: Users should immediately understand how to start the scanning process • Checking: Users should receive clear feedback on what they have scanned • Packing: Users should be able pack their products efficiently for transport

Design target 2: Users should be supported in preventing and solving problems during the use of the selfcheckout. Corresponding requirements: • Users should feel in control while using the selfcheckout • Users should be able to understand the mistakes they made without help of the employees • Users should be able to solve the mistakes they made without help of the employees • Users in need of help should be motivated to ask help from available employees • The threshold to ask for help should be lower, but it shouldn’t be forced onto the user

Redesign scope

Avoidable side effects

Our initial research efforts pointed out a lot of issues with current interactions at the self-checkout. Therefore, the main focus area of our redesign will be in the selfcheckout area around the scanners. The surrounding areas such as the entrance and exit area will also be considered during the design, but its improvement is only secondary to the design process. A previous version of the problem statement which included a wider scope for the redesign can be found in the Appendix 1-9. There is still a high probability that these areas offer us good design opportunities for an overall improvement of self-checkout, which is why we found the necessity to at least include it for future consideration.

Looking at the possibilities of the redesigns, we also looked in some of the avoidable side effects, such that the current pillars of the system are not compromised: â&#x20AC;˘ The improved system should not lead to more theft at the IKEA self-checkout â&#x20AC;˘ The improved design should not require a larger amount of human resources â&#x20AC;˘ The time spent at the self-checkout should not increase as a result of the redesigned system

In an ideal scenario all design targets and side effects will eventually be tested by the design team, however considering the limited means available, some may have to be monitored by IKEA itself over a prolonged period of time. Such as the recordings of theft in the self-checkout area, which needs more quantitative data for verification.

Phase 2 Redesign explorations

Introduction phase 2 - Redesign explorations The second phase of the report will provide an overview of initial redesign ideas based on UI targets, the development of three concept directions, concept testing setup and testing results. Finally, a conclusion will be made which converges these concepts into determine a final concept direction. This concept direction will be further developed in the following phases.

2.1 Ideation In this project the ideation consisted of three main stages, which can be seen in Fig.2.1. During Idea generation we focused on diverging as much as possible to create a wide range of possibilities from ones very close to the original design to more radical redesign ideas. The second stage focuses on finding relations between ideas which serves as a basis for the analysis and clustering of them. Finally, several sub ideas will converge into three distinct concept ideas which will be taken into the conceptualisation phase.

Fig. 2.1 Stages through the ideation process

2.1.1 Ideation & Clustering Idea generation For the idea generation we started off by creating ideas individually. This was conducted in a methodical fashion, where specific solutions were generated towards a certain requirement/ problem within the proposed design targets. This was followed by a team ideation session(see Fig.2.2) where multiple individual ideas were created where we used brainwriting and sketching.(see Appendix 2-1 for full version of individual ideas) This session was broken up into different rounds, where each round focused on a specific question relevant to the design targets. An example question would be â&#x20AC;&#x153;How can we make users feel more in control during the use of the self scanâ&#x20AC;?. Every round was timed, allowing every member to work on sub design problems for a limited time, and subsequently passed on the worksheet to the next member.This generative session resulted in a discussion which led to the clustering of ideas

Fig. 2.2 Still in the team ideation session

Idea analysis The ideas were then compiled and clustered to specific phases of the checkout process, paying attention to their relevance for each phase and whether they could be used in the implementation in all interfaces. These phases can be seen in Fig.2.3. The overarching ideas, that did not fit a specific phase, were then clustered into three themeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s: ideas to make the experience more playful, ideas to help users feel more in control & make navigation easier, and ideas for the help menu. The ideas were then further ranked on how novel they were, which we used to create three concepts with a different level of radicality. This helped us to gain a insights into how innovative our stakeholder wanted the redesign to be.

Idea Generation Individual redesign ideas

Clustering Themeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Phases

Playfull

Cue

Control & Navigation

Start Scan

Help

Check

Instore

Pay

Pack

After

Fig. 2.3 Parts of the idea generation

2.1.2 Converging to concepts Three main recurring themes were found during the clustering phase: Simplifying of processes, entertainment and personification, and changing the physical aspect of scanning. Based on this alignment three concept directions emerged, each with a different focus, where we focused on making these concepts as different as possible. As a result this would give us a broader set of insights during the user testing.They are as follows: The first concept focuses on making the use of the product as simple as possible, such that the users experience the process as streamlined and efficient. This could possibly be achieved by motivating customers to arrange the products in their cart in such a way that scanning is more convenient . Secondly, a concept was created to give the system a more personal feeling, such that users would experience it as playful and entertaining. This concept is mostly focusing on making it more pleasant for users.

efficient

transparant fluent

Physical Simplified structured efficient fluent playful transparant

Simplified Personal Physical efficient entertaining structured

The third concept focused on making the process as structured and transparent as possible. Making the process easy to understand for even the most inexperienced user, by making sure all actions are done through a logical flow of direction, making it easy to follow.

transparant playful

These main themes were used for a final reclustering phase, taking the relevant ideas from each stage and adding them to create concepts.

structured entertaining

Physical Personal

Fig. 2.4 Three concepts playful

2.2 Concepts 1 Simplicity

2 Personal

3 Physical

Less radical

Radical Efficient Streamline

Playful Entertaining

Structural Transparent

Fig. 2.5 Concepts ranging from incremental to radical

In this chapter three concepts will be introduced: Simplicity, Personal and Physical. In Fig.2.5 they are presented in the order of how radical they are, from incrementally changed (left) to radically changed (right). From each concept we will discuss the origin and how their core values can be translated into product properties. We will then examine what these product properties are, expressed in the productâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s physical and digital interfaces.

2.2.1 Concept 1 - Simplicity Origin For concept 1, our design target is to improve the fluency and efficiency of the IKEA self-checkout. The physical components of this concept are based on existing parts in IKEA (entering system, scanning machine, spots arrangement). So in our design we mainly focus on the interactions shown on the screen of the machine, which should be relatively easy to implement in practice. To achieve the fluency and efficiency, we simplify the whole self-checkout process and guide users to focus on the tasks at hand. Specifically, we set a guidance system at the entrance of self-checkout area, moved the distracting terms statement from the main scanning process, simplified the interfaces on the scanning machine, optimised the helping page and added a navigation bar to make users feel in control.

A short storyboard of this concept is shown in Fig.2.6 and a physical representation of the concept is shown in Fig.2.7. The next page shows the original ideas from the brainstorm that served as a base to create the Simplicity concept and the elements that were designed to fit it. In Fig.2.8 the flowchart of the interfaces are shown.

Electronics integrated in the back

IKEA Colored scanner

Open workspace

Fig. 2.6 Storyboard of concept 1 46

Fig. 2.7 The checkout station of concept 1

Fig. 2.8 Interfaces of concept 1

2.2.2 Concept 2 - Personal Origin With concept two, we had the goal of making the selfscan process of IKEA more entertaining and involving a human touch of the process in the self-checkout area. For this focused on making the digital interface more personal, restyled the checkout-stations and improved the layout to create a more positive environment. To infuse this human touch in the digital interface we decided to make the whole interface more visual and added the ikea shopping attendants into the help-area of the interface. Next to this we chose to create a dedicated base for the shopping attendants within the layout, which should prevent the feeling of someone looking over your shoulder. This makes the whole interaction with the product more welcoming.

A physical representation of the concept is shown in Fig. 2.9. The next page shows the original ideas from the brainstorm that served as a base to create the Personal concept and the elements that were designed to fit it. In Fig.2.10 the flowchart of the interfaces are shown. Electronics integrated in the back

IKEA Colored scanner

We made the process more entertaining by removing technological noise and decided to recolor the checkout station to reflect ikeaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personality better, while keeping the main components intact. In order to make the waiting feel shorter, we motivated users to re-arrange their products for easy scanning in line, giving them a tip on how to improve their shopping experience.

Open workspace

Fig. 2.9 The checkout station of concept 2 50

Entrance Screens

Main Screens

Consent

Waiting time

Scanning

Start

Help Entering barcode

Enter barcode manually

Inserting card

Spot assignment

Thank You

Fig. 2.10 Interfaces of concept 2

Checking

Way of payment

2.2.3 Concept 3 - Physical Origin The focus of the third concept is to improve the transparency and structure of the IKEA self-checkout. For this we made a big adaption in both the physical and digital layout of the concept. To create a structured system,we added a rolling band to the physical interface. Users will be motivated to unpack the products from their shopping bag, creating a clear overview of the products and proposing an order in which to handle them. Next to this users are directly able to pack their product in one action, after the scanning and checking, through creating a hole that fits the IKEA transportation bags.

A short storyboard of this concept is shown in Fig.2.11 and a physical representation of the concept is shown in Fig.2.12. The next page shows the original ideas from the brainstorm that served as a base to create the Physical concept and the elements that were designed to fit it. In Fig.2.13 the flowchart of the interfaces are shown. Electronics integrated in the back

To create transparency, the digital layout gives visual information and detailed information about the product being scanned, that allows the user to scan and check directly.

One action: scanning, checking and packing

Motivating users to place their products openly on the counter

Fig. 2.11 Storyboard of concept 3

Fig. 2.12 The checkout station of concept 3

Entrance Screens

Main Screens

Waiting time

Consent

Help Entering barcode

Inserting card

Spot assignment

Start

Enter barcode manually

Scanning

Checking

Thank You

Fig. 2.13 Interfaces of concept 3

Way of payment

2.3 User test In order to see which concepts and which aspects of the concepts work well in achieving our design goal, we set up a user test. In this chapter the approach and set-up of the user test is described.

2.3.1 Approach Scope

General idea

As our design goal is specifically focused on the scanning process and the corresponding interaction with the interfaces, this is main focus of the test. However, some concepts introduced changes in the scanning process. These changes resulted in adding aspects to the entrance of the checkout area, therefore we decided to include this part within the scope of the user test too.

Every participant will test all three concepts, therefore we will obtain data of participants comparing the concepts. We will make participants go through two tasks: 1. Entering the self-checkout area 2. Performing the scanning and buying process. In this task a problem is built in - a malfunctioning barcode so that participants can experience the supportiveness of the system when a problem occurs.

Research questions Based upon the previously defined design targets, we created a set of research questions: 1. Which concept feels the most intuitive? a. Which entrance system is perceived to be most intuitive? b. Which scanning and checking process was perceived to be most intuitive? 2. Which concept is experienced as the most fluent? a. For which concept was the time spent throughout the process perceived as the shortest? 3. Which concept feels the most supportive? a. Which consent screen is most suitable? b. Which general interaction is perceived as the most supportive? c. Which help function is perceived as the most supportive?

2.3.2 Concept test set-up Protocol An overview of the test can be seen in Fig.2.15. The user test area is divided in two sections, the testing area where the participant fulfills the tasks and the discussion area where the participant compares the concepts (see Fig.2.14). While fulfilling the tasks the participants interact with a scale model representing the self-checkout in IKEA, through which they will guide an avatar, represented by a Playmobil Fig.(see Fig.2.16 on the next page for the parts of the prototype). Between the three concepts the only thing that is different in the prototype are the digital screens and the presence (or not) of the guidance screen. Facilitator Participant

Observer

TESTING SECTION

DISCUSSION SECTION

Fig. 2.14 Test set-up

Fig. 2.15 Test overview

Measurement & equipement

Data

To gather the needed measurements we made use of an observation form and a video camera. Next to this a timer is used to measure how much time users needed to walk through the concepts. To immerse participants we let them operate a working hand scanner and fake packages to scan during the test.

From these measurements follow only qualitative data. This is in the shape of an observation form and a video of every participant. These data are analyzed in chapter 2.4.

To then assess the usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; opinions about the differences between the concepts we did an interview. We made use of print-outs displaying the screens, which enables participants to remember and point at aspects. The description of these measurements and the full list of equipment can be found in Appendix 2-4.

PRODUCTS & SCANNER

INTERFACE

Roles During the concept tests we as researchers will take the following roles: 1. Facilitator The facilitator introduces the topic, makes sure the participant feels comfortable, explains the scenario and asks the questions. When necessary the facilitator helps navigating in the interface, answers questions by that participant and leads the participant through the concept tests. 2. Observer The observer generally observes, takes notes and supports the facilitator. Through the use of standard observation forms he is able to take quick notes in a consistent manner. He also makes sure the facilitator follows the script/procedure, if for instance a question is skipped.

LEGO SCALE MODEL

Fig. 2.16 Parts of the prototype

2.3.3 Participants Selection

Instructions

For the user test we decided to simplify our personaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and split them by the aspect that divides them the most: an experienced and inexperienced group in terms of experience with self scanning systems either at IKEA or at another store. We stated the criteria as follows:

To create consistency between the tests the instructions to the participant are written out, with among others asking for permission to video record, asking the participant to think aloud and explaining the scenario. The full instruction can be found in appendix 2-4.

Experienced: used a self scanner system more than three times Inexperienced: used a self scanner system three times or less As every participant tries all of the three concepts, we have to make up for the influence of learnability. To do this the order of concepts shown to every participant alternates. We will use six participants, three experienced and three inexperienced, so that for both groups every participant can start with another concept. We will use students from the Industrial Design Faculty of the TU Delft as participants for the user tests, as they will have a low threshold to participate. They will be screened by asking whether they have experience with using a self scanning system.

6 Inexperienced

Experienced

Fig. 2.17 Participants composition

2.3.4 Discussion There are some limitations and oversimplifications to this user test, these shall be discussed in this chapter. At first, there are some differences concerning the scanning environment between the user test setup and the IKEA checkout environment. For instance, in the user test participants go through the process alone. In IKEA however customers are often accompanied, which can lead to either distraction or teamwork. Also at IKEA there are always other people around; people waiting in the queue, attendants looking at you, etc. The possible effects these people have on the scanning experience are not taken into account in our user test. Furthermore, there are certain limitations based on the participant selection. Firstly, students of design engineering (as all participants are) in general have relatively much experience with using digital devices, probably more than the average customer of IKEA. Hence, the experienced fluency in the user tests might turn out higher than it should be. Also, in the user test we did not take possible physical issues as poor eyesight in mind. In the final concept however, aspects such as a small font should be avoided.

2.4 Analysis Within the data analysis we spent quite some time on discussing the results, leading to a set of key insights from the test we all agreed with. We then compared the three concepts through a DATUM method (comparing on multiple factors, using one concept as a baseline) to create a final concept, combining the best parts of these concepts.

2.4.1 Process overview In order to compare the data from the observation forms and videos, we used several stages of analysis. The first stage consists of creating an overview in a table format to compare outcomes of all the participants. The horizontal rows show the participants, the vertical columns list the key data in different stages of the self-scanning process. The second stage involved writing down keywords from this comparison table on post-its to cluster and have further discussions. These are then translated into key insights. At the end of the analysis, we evaluated the key insights with the DATUM method, which allowed us to pick the most liked concepts as the basis and see which parts of the other concepts were evaluated as better by the participants. As a result this helped us to draw to conclusions that serve as a guideline for further development of the final concept. An overview of the analysis process can be found in Fig.2.18.

Fig. 2.18 Overview of the analysis process

2.4.2 Data analysis Comparison table From the observation forms (see Appendix 2-5) and videos of the test, we extracted data and filled this into a data comparison table. The items recorded in the table included a wide variety of data including: hesitations, movements, errors that occurred, thought processes and preferences and intentions of users (from the think aloud method). Fig.2.20 shows two examples of data with a corresponding screenshot from the video. While filling in the comparison table, we used a colour coding system to indicate the severity of problems or comments. They are coded in the following manner: critical/serious/ minor/positive. Besides colour coding, we also numbered each data item to indicate which screen in our redesign interfaces the comments pertain to. A small part of the comparison table is shown in Fig.2.19, the full version can be consulted in Appendix 2-6.

Fig. 2.19 Small part of the comparison table 66

The term “Correct and Pay” is not clear to participant 6.

Participant 5: “…oh the last page is confusing me, because I am not sure what “start” means here….”

Fig. 2.20 Screenshots from videos recorded during the test

2.4.3 Clustering data Clustering on the wall Because it turned out to be a difficult task to conduct a discussion from a spreadsheet together, we decided to write keywords of all the data from the comparison table on post-its. This enabled us to have further discussions on the wall, clustering them into pros and cons. Fig.2.21 shows the wall with post-its. The horizontal row (pink post-its) lists the stages of the self checkout process and the vertical column (pink post-it) lists three concepts and their pros and cons. While green post-its represent inexperienced participants, the orange post-its indicate experienced participants. Discussing and connecting the data led to insights for all concepts. These are discussed in the next chapter.

Fig. 2.21 Clustering of data on the wall for discussion 67

InsightsInsights per concept 2.4.4 Concept 1 - Simplicity Taken all together, the first concept is clear, fluent, and efficient though it makes people feel distant when comparing it to the second concept. (insight 1-3) The following are the most important insights from the user test results concerning concept one:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;I like this part the most, because it shows me how to start the self-scanner in a clear visual way. â&#x20AC;? (participant 5, inexperienced) 68

Fig. 2.22 Video screenshot and quote from participant during the test

insight 1-1. Participants think it’s a simple and clear guidance that indicates which self-checkout counter is available for customers at the front of the waiting line. However, one experienced participant thinks the guidance is redundant since there’s not that many counters and they can check for empty spots by themselves.

insight 1-2. There’s a clear instruction on what to do and how to start which is helpful especially for inexperienced participants. (p5, “I really like this feature”)

insight 1-4. The option of scanning your family card is overlooked by 3/6 participants, so it is not clear.

Quotes and Observation “number 8 is helpful!” (participant 1, experienced) “I prefer the visual way to indicate the station number.” (participant 3, experienced)

Quotes and Observation “I like this picture because it teaches me how to start to use.” (participant 5, inexperienced) “I immediately understand how to use the scanner. ” (participant 1, experienced)

Quotes and Observation from observation: most of the participants notice that they can scan their family cards in this step during the test.

Insights Concept 2 - Personified Participants liked the personal touch with the character from concept 2, though the way to interact with the character should be more obvious and intuitive. (insight 2-4 ) The following are the most important insights from the user test results concerning concept two:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nice that you can have something to do when you are waiting in the line and it makes you get prepared for self-scanning.â&#x20AC;? (participant 6, inexperienced)

Fig. 2.23 Video screenshot and quote from participant during the test

insight 2-1. 5/6 Participants mentioned that they like the preparation instruction because on one hand it gets people prepared for self-checkout, on the other hand it keeps people busy in the queue which shortens the perceived waiting time.

insight 2-2. All participants think the icon and description of the consent page are too intimidating.

Quotes and Observation “It can speed the later process.” (participant 3, experienced) “See the guidience in advance prepared me for self-scanning ” (participant 4, inexperienced)

Quotes and Observation All of the participants stated that the icon is too overwhelming. “I feel it’s too intimidated because of the camera icon.” (participant 2, experienced)

insight 2-3. Participants could easily see the total amount of items they have purchased which gives them a sense of confirmation.

Quotes and Observation “It immediatetly makes sense becaseu it’s clear and obvious.” (participant 2, experienced)

Insights Concept 3 - Physical There are some pitfalls that we can learn from concept 3, and the followings are the most important insights from the test result of concept three:

“Oh, that’s a lot of information. Well if I am the first in line the two minutes is the only thing meaningful to me.” (participant 1, experienced)

Fig. 2.24 Video screenshot and quote from participant during the test

Quotes and Observation “It’s a lot of information.” (participant 1, experienced) “Seeing the time makes me feel longer.” (participant 2, experienced) insight 3-1. Participants felt there’s too much unrelated information on the screen.

Quotes and Observation from observation, most of the participants didn’t notice the sentence of consent on the screen. insight 3-2. The text of the consent is not readable on the screen.

Quotes and Observation “the scanning is clear and obvious” (participant 2, experienced)

insight 3-3. Participants liked the visualized way to show the product they purchased

Quotes and Observation “FAQ? there are no questions? Don’t like it.” (participant 1, experienced) insight 3-4. “FAQ” is not an easy understandable way to describe the term for helping page.

2.4.5 Comparing concepts DATUM method

Explanation of scores

The next step is to compare the concepts with the gained insights. To do this we use the DATUM method, which uses one of the concepts as a base reference to compare the other concepts to. This comparison method leads to an understanding of the value of the concepts in relation to one another and provides a simple matrix suitable for discussion.

Intuitivity Both concepts 1 and 2 have a positive element at the entrance in preparing them for scanning (concept 2) and guiding them to the self checkout (concept 1), whereas concept 3â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waiting time screen gives an overload of information. The visualization of how to scan (concept 1 and 3) and scanned products (concept 3) add to the intuitivity, just like the general style of concept 1.

The concepts are compared using the criteria mentioned in the research questions, and the insights from the results section are used to evaluate the concepts. The insights used are numbered (e.g. 1-2) so that they can easily be found and referenced during discussion. These numbers can also be found in chapter 5.2. The colours in the table from Fig.# shows the scoring of the concepts. In this case concept 2 was used as the reference concept or DATUM. Colour coding is done as follows: better/neutral/ worse than the DATUM. The DATUM table is shown in Fig.2.25

Fluency The perceived time spent by the participants was lowest in concept 1, followed by concept 2. This can indicate a logical flow of steps and a minimum of confusion. Supportive The consent screen of concept 2 was experienced as intimidating, whereas the consent was completely overseen in concept 3. The general interaction with concept 2 felt more supportive because of the presence of a seperate help area with a man displayed, whereas concept 1 was perceived to be rather distant. The help function was most clear in concept 1, whereas the interaction with the displayed character (concept 2) was not completely clear and the FAQ helping page (concept 3) was not appreciated in general. Total Concept 1 scores highest on both fluency and supportiveness, whereas concept 3 scores worse than both concepts on almost every aspect. Concept 2 excels in a supportive feeling in the general interaction.

Fig. 2.25 DATUM table 75

2.4.6 Conclusions - converging to one concept Since concept 1 had the best scores in the DATUM evaluation method we can use its structure as the basis for the final concept. To this structure, we can try to add parts that have positive properties of the other concepts, as long as they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t interfere with concept 1â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s positive qualities. A visual representation of the convergence to one concept can be seen in Fig.2.26. The most important property we can transfer from concept 2 is the seperate help section with a character displayed on the screen. This may help change the distant perception of concept 1 into a more personal one. The interaction with this help function has to be optimized though. Some other examples of properties that can be implemented are for example: concept 2â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s instructions for pre-arranging the bar codes in queue and clearly showing the total number of purchases at the checking page. The next phase shows the convergence into one redesign, where these properties are merged into one concept that is intuitive, fluent and supportive.

Fig. 2.26 Convergence to one concept 77

Phase 3

Redesign

Introduction phase 3 - Redesign In the previous phases an analysis of the current IKEA self-checkout system and the generation of concepts were discussed. In this phase our final redesign of the IKEA self-checkout system will be presented, including visuals and a justification of the design choices that were made along the process. This report also describes a performed usage inspection on this redesign and its conclusions.Finally, a prototype that will be used to test the redesign in IKEA is discussed, including the chosen prototype approach, the prototype characteristics and a reflection on its usefulness.

3.1 Redesign Proposal In this chapter we present our final redesign concept of the IKEA selfcheckout.This redesign proposal is based on an analysis of the current IKEA self-checkout and the testing we did with three newly designed concepts, combining the best parts of those concepts into one.

3.1.1 Redesign - in general Redesign aspects (see Fig. 3.1) The design goal has been phrased as:

The interaction between the user and the selfcheckout should feel simple and fluent, making the user feel supported and guided through the process. To comply to this design goal, the IKEA self-checkout system is redesigned on three different aspects: the queue system, the counter and the digital interface. An overview of the redesign can be seen in Fig. 3.1 on the right, with the three different aspects highlighted. This final concept is based on the best parts of three earlier tested concepts, with which a user test has been conducted. The final concept is a product of the results of this user test and an evaluation of these results within the group. More information on the convergence into one redesign can be found in Appendix 3-1:Convergence to redesign. The following pages will separately show each redesign aspect in detail, together with an explanation of the design choices made.

Queue system The queue system has a central screen on the end of the waiting line. Next to this an instructive poster is displayed in the waiting line. Self-checkout counter The self-checkout counter has been redesigned to nudge users to create more order in the process of scanning and to directly pack their products after scanning. Digital interface The digital interface of the self-checkout has been redesigned to feel more supportive, to be more clear and to reduce redundant steps.

3 1

Fig. 3.1 The redesign of the self-checkout and its three aspects

3.1.2 Our intended interaction In general

Physical elements

With this redesign of the self-checkout system we aim to create a new journey of steps the IKEA customers will go through. Fig. 3.3 (shown over multiple pages) shows an overview of the designed main phases of the new product interaction.

The icons below the phases describe the physical elements used during these stages and include touch points such as the screen and the scanner, but also personal items such as payment cards and bags that are relevant to the interaction. A legend of these icons can be found in Fig. 3.2 on the next page.

The phases of scanning and packing are not always done separately and in this sequence in practice because of different user habits, but for the analysis it is convenient to display these phases as if they happen separately.

Further elaboration on the exact sub-interactions with the physical elements can be found in the product interaction table in Appendix 3-5.

Digital interfaces Next to the images, you can see the relevant digital interfaces the user encounters during these steps. The digital interface has a focus on supportiveness and making users feel in control. The Help screens play a big role in this, however are not part of the intented interaction and therefore not included. The full digital interface overview can be found in Appendix 3-6.

Fig. 3.2 Legend of physical items

Fig. 3.3 Intended interactions 85

Scanning IKEA Family card Initially we wanted to streamline the process by allowing customers to skip language selection and accepting the terms by scanning their IKEA card. However, IKEA wished to keep the ‘accepting the terms’ phase separately, so to accommodate this we moved the ‘scanning IKEA card’ phase back to the end of the scanning process, just

before payment. This moment is chosen because the user already has to grab their wallet during this phase. In this way we don’t use any redundant physical interactions and also inform the user about the benefits of the card before payment.

3.1.3 Redesign - the queue system The queue system of the self-checkout area is redesigned to make the queuing process clearer and more fluent, through helping users spend their time in line effectively and creating a guiding system at the front of the line. A visualisation of the system can be seen on the right, next to an elaboration on the design choices that were made.

Fig. 3.4: Visualisation of the redesigned queue system

Design choices explained 1 1

Checkout guidance screen Users are directed towards available self-checkout stations by a screen at the front of the waiting line. This screen makes sure there is no doubt among the customers whether they can pick a spot theirselves or have to wait, which sometimes happened because shopping attendants were not able to offer continuous guidance. As this guidance screen is already present at the normal checkout counters in IKEA, this will be familiar for the customers. Poster In the queue, users are hinted by a poster to rearrange their items so that the barcodes face upwards. By doing this users are kept active during waiting, lowering their perception of the waiting time. At the same time the scanning process will be more efficiently. Introduction of Erik ERIK, the character of IKEAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s product manuals, is introduced. He will be present in the interface screens as well.

3.1.4 Redesign - the self-checkout counter The self-checkout counter has been redesigned to nudge users to create more order in the process of scanning and to directly pack their products after scanning. It does so by emphasizing a flow in moving left to right, by creating a more apparent unpacking and packing area and a downward ramp connecting the scanning and packing area. Next to this the receipt printer is placed above the packing area. The redesign can be seen in Fig. 3.5, with an explanation of the design choices on the next page. The final dimensions and related ergonomics can be seen in Fig. 3.6 and are further explained in Appendix 3-3. 3 5

Fig. 3.5 Physical redesign

Design choices explained 1

Scanner holder In order to ensure that the hand scanner is quickly recognised and located by the user, the scanner holder is located in the centre of the counter on the edge of the working area. The holder consists of a different material and colour to contrast the rest of the scanning area. The holder orientates the scanner to face towards the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hand to make it easy to grab. By locating the scanner in a central position on the front edge, the cable will not be an obstruction when users scan items and should eliminate awkward movements while transferring goods to the packing area. Overall this should provide a more pleasant and efficient scanning experience. Unpacking area The unpacking area composes of a designated elevated flat platform for customers to place their yellow bag prior to interacting with the digital interface. The bottom of the platform will consist of a patch of non slip material corresponding to the colour of the IKEA in store shopping bag. The effect of this implementation is that customers should immediately see that there is a designated area for them to place their goods before scanning.

Screen The screen is centrally located and corresponds to the relevant ergonomic calculations previously conducted. The screen itself will fit flush with the backboard of the scanning area. By integrating the screen in an unobtrusive fashion, it should allow for a flowing experience free of obstruction, allowing users to have a more seamless range of movements while unpacking, scanning and finally to packing. Scanning/packing area The scanning area is directly located below the screen with a gradual slant towards another flat where users can pack their goods.The scan area is free of clutter and allows products to be scanned and moved in a convenient, efficient manner. The physical profile of the packing area nudges users to move from left to right while scanning, with the goal of motivating direct packing and keeping the central scanning area clear. The slant allows items to be rolled/pushed towards the packing area in a controlled manner to prevent the damaging of goods. Receipt printer The receipt printer consists of a small extruded slot for the receipt. The receipThe printer is located directly above the bag, indicating that users have finished the process. This also nudges users to place the receipt on top of the products in the bag or just simply grabbed. As a result users should keep the receipt in their hand, preventing that they have to grab their wallet again, before they may pass the exit. 91

Workspace depth: 500mm

(DINED comfortable reach envelopes at H=1480mm P5= 480mm , Age 75 stature< 1750)

Screen top height = 1610 mm

(Eye Height P5=1634mm, Dutch adults mixed 20-60)

Screen center height = 1480 mm (1610 - 260 (screen height)/2 = 1480)

Working Height: 1025 mm (P32 Elbow height, mixed 20-60) Package

Package height: ~100mm

Fig. 3.6 Ergonomics-based dimensions of the redesign

3.1.5 Redesign - the digital interface Design choices explained The digital interfaces of the self-checkout counter are redesigned in order to be clear, supportive and facilitating a fluent process. The basis for the visual style used in the interfaces is shown in Fig. 3.7 with a justification of the choices on the right. Examples of the digital interfaces and an explanation of the design choices are shown on the following pages.

Colours and font Blue and yellow are the colours IKEA uses in general, which are chosen to give the interface an IKEA feeling. Grey is chosen as neutral colour to serve as a background. All text is done in the font Verdana, which is also used in IKEA in their expressions. Hierarchy To make the interfaces intuitive for the users, we consistently used a hierarchy where important buttons and emphasized content are yellow and where less important buttons are blue. The button that leads the user to the next step is always placed in the bottom right, the back button on the left top. The help section is always present in the same area on the left side of the interface.

Fig. 3.7 Visual style of the digital interfaces 93

Languages In the first screen all possible languages are displayed so that the user is nudged to set this from the start if necessary. In the other screens a single language button is displayed, to prevent clutter. Clicking this button will show all language options.

ERIK (IKEA character) To increase the supportive feeling of the system, ERIK, the character displayed in IKEA manuals, is added to the interfaces. To give the interface a dynamic feeling he takes on a different pose in every screen fitting to the corresponding step.

Help button To increase the supportivity of the system the user can access a help page from every screen, containing relevant information to that step. The button here is labeled â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;help pageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to prevent the user being afraid to accidentally call up an attendant by pressing the button, which was the case in the original design.

Back button To make the user feel in control, all screens that have a possible step back contain a back-button.

Highlighted item To provide the user with clear feedback that an item was scanned, the last added item is highlighted in yellow.

Deleting items Due to security reasons IKEA requires that deleting an item is only allowed with the help of a shopping assistant. Hence, when the button is pressed a popup occurs where the user can confirm his/her action, resulting in a shopping assistant to come and delete the item.

Help information The help page contains information addressing possible problems or doubts related to that specific step, so that users can quickly find what they are looking for. Visual explanation In steps where physical actions are required by the user, a visualization of the action is added to make it more clear and quicker to understand for the user. Call attendant For other problems, the user has the option to call a shopping attendant. This prevents that users are being negatively surprised by a shopping attendant coming in to help. This often happened in the current design, while in the redesign users are in control of deciding when to ask for help. 95

Displaying amount of items To highlight the amount of purchased products this info is displayed in a bigger text size. This has the benefits that it gives the user a quick overview, while enabling the shopping attendants to easily spot how many products a customer is paying for, making it easier to check purchases and prevent theft.

Family card benefits To inform the user on the benefits of using the IKEA Family card, this information is added to the payment page.

Payment options Compared to the current design, the payment options are reduced from 4 to 2: the options ‘IKEA Family voucher’ and ‘Refund/gift card’ are combined into ‘Voucher’ and the ‘Other payment’ option, which did not function, are removed.

3.2 Usage Inspection To eliminate some of the more obvious insights that we might encounter during the final user test, we adopted the mind of the user and conducted a usage evaluation. This helped us make sure that we will be able to obtain important insights when assessing the quality of our redesign in the final user test.

3.2.1 Usage Inspection Method Three members of our group adopted the role of one of the three personaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s(see Fig. 3.8), which was indicated through wearing a mask representing this. They then participated in two walkthroughs of the selfscan system, based on two different methods. The process is visually explained in Fig. 3.9. To here find some more specific persona based insights we immersed the testers into the context of three personaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, for which we used masks that had to be worn throughout the test. During the first walkthrough they focussed on the physical interface and how this complements the digital interface during scanning. During this they acted out their assigned persona, while they were asked questions by the facilitator. These were about the ergonomics, the layout of the features (both physical and digital) and some persona specific questions, to stimulate users to keep thinking aloud. The second walkthrough focused on the digital interface. During this they were asked to write down how they felt about the steps they took during the progress and whether any of the usability heuristics by Nielsen (1994) presented had been violated. An extensive set-up of the test can be found in Appendix 3-4.

100

Fig. 3.8 One of our group members going through the first walkthrough

Fig. 3.9 Visual representation of the usage inspection method 101

Conclusions Concerning the layout of the digital interface we generally found that in both the consent- and the help pages the text was too long. As a result these pages were not always read by users. We also noticed the tone of voice could be improved, where it should present better defined options, to make it easier for users to move between the different steps throughout the process. Next to this we noticed there were a lot of apologetic sentences, that gave the impression that the system was badly built. Therefore these were rephrased or deleted. However the images in the digital interface were sometimes too small or did not provide enough information. The visual explanation of how scanning works was not really clear. Similarly the image at the final page did not directly explain to users that they would need to hold and scan their receipt to exit the scanning area. However the size of the assistance character ‘ERIK’ was fine in most pages, and only attracted attention when wanted. Only in the final page he could be displayed bigger, where bringing him to the foreground could give a more playful impression. Upon observation of the physical interactions with the digital interface, we firstly found that the stage of scanning the IKEA Family card was inconvenient for customers, as they had to take out their wallet just to scan their IKEA family card. Next to this users sometimes found scanning inconvenient, where they were confused

102

about the moment to pack their products and had trouble moving big packages. With regards to the physical interface we noticed that the size of the prototype was too big, because the range of movement became a problem. Users had difficulty with moving and lifting products around due to the height of the counter .This ultimately led to less direct packing, as movements were too large and inconvenient to be comfortable. The scanner’s new location was logical at the front of the counter, however we could not assess whether this had an direct effect on making packing easier. Reflection Looking back we were glad we did both a perspective based inspection and heuristic evaluation. The perspective based inspection lead to primarily insights on the physical interface, however the use of masks did not give the immersing effect we were hoping for. This was probably because the masks were uncomfortable to wear and obstructing people’s vision. Other accessoiries like a cane or hat to wear might have worked better here. As a result the insights from the heuristic evaluation were also not influenced by the assigned persona’s, leading to more general insights in both the the physical and digital interface.

3.3 Prototype To be able to test the prototype with real users, a prototype will be created. This chapter will outline the approaches taken in regard to both the digital and physical interfaces of the prototype.

103

3.3.1 Prototype approach Physical approach The prototype essentially consists of a digital interface and multiple physical elements (the scanner, the payment system, the products purchased). These both play an essential role in the interaction between the user and the self-checkout. The interaction with these physical elements cannot be separated from the digital interaction, as they are done simultaneously and without them the full interaction experience will be gone. Hence, we choose to create a prototype with both the physical and the digital parts integrated with each other. Not all parts will be prototyped in high fidelity, some will be made to work like in the wizard of oz: creating the same experience by making it seem like its functioning completely. As we are not testing for a fully functioning technical prototype but testing whether the designed elements capture the overall interaction we have envisioned. With a final user test we aim to answer the following questions: â&#x20AC;˘ Is the new design more fluent than the current design in IKEA? â&#x20AC;˘ Is the new design more intuitive than the design in IKEA? â&#x20AC;˘ Does the physical interface operate and combine well together with the digital interface?

104

For the prototype we constructed a partial representation of the redesign, leaving out the part below the working service. The primary reason for this is to ensure that the prototype on a whole can be transported and stored easily for on-site testing. To attain relevant results it was decided to develop the counter as realistically as possible in terms of its basic form and dimensions to implement the desired interaction and experience with the proposed redesign. The counter and screen backboard will consist of laser cut timber parts with finger joints to allow for easy construction without the need for a lot of external tools and making transport easier for user testing. During testing the prototype would be put on top of a table with a height of 75cm to ensure a comfortable working height

Digital approach The interface is prototyped to function as an almost fully working touch screen interface. All necessary functions in the user test are developed into screens. By using InVision these screens are made interactive; participants can control the screens by touch. Some functions require an action to proceed: scanning the items, scanning the IKEA Family card, payment by card and printing the receipt. These actions will be done using a Wizard of Oz approach. For example: a laptop is connected to the touch screen, so that a tester behind the checkout counter can skip to the next screen when a participant scans an item.

105

3.3.2 Prototype characteristics Physical characteristics Our goal here was to make the handling of the products more efficient, where we want users to scan, check and pack their products in one action. Hence opting for a partial full scale model(see Fig. 3.10), that can be divided into 3 different areas: Unpacking, scanning and packing. The small indent on the left of the counter has been prototyped to the dimensions of a standard IKEA in store shopping bag.The height and width of these scanning and packing surfaces were all determined based on ergonomic considerations, that can be found in Appendix 3-3. The preferred rubber material on the base of the indent was not accounted for in the prototype. Ultimately we want to investigate whether users will place their goods in this designated space prior to interacting with the digital interface and the scanner. Likewise the scanning area has been applied full scale dimensions to accommodate how users will actually utilize that space when they are scanning their products. Various aspects can be addressed here whether users use this flat surface while scanning the products, either to keep in place while retrieving barcode, whether they utilize ramp to aid packing, will it motivate users to directly place their products into their shopping bag, will the shape profile of this area address reduce awkward movements from the usage inspection,etc. Once again the surfaces of these areas have not been modified to reflect material properties.

Fig. 3.10 Photo of the prototype 106

The height and width of these scanning and packing surfaces were all determined based on ergonomic considerations, that can be found in Appendix 3-3. The height and width of these scanning and packing surfaces were all determined based on ergonomic considerations, that can be found in Appendix 3-3. When looking into the scanning of the products we found that users currently often scan their products and put them back down before packing them. A working hand scanner is implement as a high fidelity feature in the prototype to give the user a direct feeling of controlling the scanning the process. Likewise the scanner holder plays a critical role due to its location and orientation. The holder is constructed of a white material that contrasts to the black colour of the hand scanner. The user test should reveal whether the hand scanner is easily identifiable, Is it easy and comfortable to grab (if so what hand they use) and does the form of the holder have any influence on the scanning space directly below the screen. Upon payment being indicated, users will be encouraged to interact with a stationary 3D printed pin machine and mimic contactless payment or inserting their pin card and entering their pin. In terms of aesthetics the pin machine retains its primary feature, however the fidelity was kept to a bare minimum as it an standard installation for most self checkout units and was defined in the project scope.

Prior to exiting, users will have to get their receipt, we will move the outlet for this to the right above the shopping bag. A 3D printed receipt printer slot that will be inserted in the backboard, and a receipt will be dispensed in the packing area via wizard of oz to replicate its movement, speed,etc.

Digital interface characteristics The digital interfaces are created in InVision that allows for a robust, controllable and consistent digital prototype. The interfaces consist of all the options for users to successfully navigate their way to purchasing their in goods in an intuitive, supportive and fluent manner. The prototype will be operated on a iiyama ProLite touchscreen monitor borrowed from the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering. The interfaces will be calibrated and adjusted to suit the desired screen size. The screen sits on a pre built frame that can be tilted to suit angles from 30 to 90 degrees. The screen will be tilted to 90 degrees and raised to meet the designated screen slot on the physical interface, hence combining both digital and physical interfaces together into one unit.

107

3.3.3 Reflection on prototype Physical part

Digital part

With regards to the physical elements, predicting an outcome for this experience is difficult as the current design was not utilized in the usage inspection, but rather inspired by it. Possible insights could be gained from the pilot test, that might allow for minor adjustments prior to the actual user test.

The digital interface uses the redesigned screens and the required functions are working interactively. Therefore, the prototyped digital experience is very close to the real redesign. One pitfall is that participants can move the interface, which makes the screen go out of place. This happens when a participant swipes over the screen instead of clicking. When this happens, either the participant himself or the facilitator has to move the screen back to its place, which interferes with the experience.

The main downfall of the physical prototype is the sheer size and dimensions of it. Each part was intricately planned and calculated,and possibly finer details such as aesthetics were lost in the process.The prototype does not embody all the desired details of our proposed redesign with regards to material properties and the application of colour. Obviously this will not accurately represent the potential behaviour the products and other props may potentially react in such an area. Therefore these product properties cannot fully be tested.

108

109

110

Phase 4 Evaluation

Introduction phase 4 - Evaluation In the previous phases, an analysis of the current IKEA self-checkout system, the generation of concepts and the redesign of IKEA self-checkout were presented and discussed. In this phase, the user test of our redesign will be presented, including the test set-up plan and the results of the test. This report also discusses if design targets have been achieved and gives advice on concept improvement based on these results. Finally, the improved redesign, including the queue system, the self-checkout counter and the digital interfaces will be presented with recommendations for future consideration.

112

4.1 User test set up In this chapter, the design of a user test is presented. Starting from the research questions we aim to answer through the user test, we will discuss the test method, the chosen participants and the data we are planning to gather.

113

4.1.1 User test Research Questions 2.1. Does the new design reduce the amount of problems that happen during the process? - Users should not encounter any of the current number of redundant steps during the use of the selfcheckout

Based upon our design targets and requirements set during phase 1, we created a set of research questions in order to assess which aspects of the new design can help us achieve these requirements. The research questions are divided into sub questions that are formulated in such a way, to ensure that the earlier defined requirements of phase one are met.

2.2. Can the physical interface motivate users to pack products directly after scanning? - Packing: Users should be able pack their products efficiently for transport

They are as follows: Design target 1: The scanning process should be intuitive and easy to understand 1

Does the new design reach our design goal of intuitiveness? 1.1. Do the participants feel any hesitation during the process? - Users should know during every step what is expected from them - Users should not need to ask employees to better understand the scanning process 1.2. Does the operating procedure of both digital and physical interface go well with each other? - Scanning: Users should immediately understand how to start the scanning process - Checking: Users should receive clear feedback on what they have scanned

Does the new design reach our design goal of fluency?

114

Design target 2: Users should be supported in preventing and solving problems during the use of the self-checkout 3

Does the new design reach the design goal of supportiveness? 3.1. Does Erik (the IKEA character) (see Fig. 4.1)help to give the sense of supportiveness? 3.2. When encountering problems, can the user access the help page quickly? - Users should feel in control while using the selfcheckout 3.3. Whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the attitude of participants when accessing the help page? - Users in need of help should be motivated to ask help from available employees - The threshold to ask for help should be lower, but it

Methods shouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be forced onto the user 3.4. Does the help page provide the help needed at the moment? - Users should be able to understand the mistakes they made without help of the employees Users should be able to solve the mistakes they made - without help of the employees 4

Does the new design give a sense of efficiency? 4.1. Do users feel it is time saving when experiencing the new design?

In order to answer these research questions, a final user test was conducted at IKEA Delft. During the previous concept test, which compared three concepts (see chapter2, we focused on testing the digital interface concepts. In this test the physical interface of the redesign is also prototyped and tested, to provide an integrated and complete experience. Therefore an additional focus of our test was to see if the physical and digital part of our redesign synchronise with each other as stated in research question 1.2.

Fig. 4.1 IKEA character Erik 115

4.1.2 User test set up General Process Every (group of) participant(s) will first be welcomed, after which they are asked to sign a consent form. They will then start the experiment by experiencing the prototype, during which they are asked to think aloud. Before the test they will be briefly interviewed about their previous experiences with self-scanning and after the test they will be interviewed about the new experience.

Set up The user test area is divided in three areas (see Fig. 4.2):

During the test, the participants will perform two tasks: - Entering the self-checkout area and re-arranging their products - Performing the scanning and buying of the products To make sure that participants can experience the supportiveness of the system, they will encounter a malfunctioning barcode, nudging them to access the scan help page. For a detailed description of the whole process please see test protocol in Appendix 4-1.

Fig. 4.2 User test area in IKEA

116

Introduction and post questionnaire area A place with chairs and a table is created to have participants conveniently sign a consent form. Paper printouts of all the digital screens of the prototype are present in order to have a discussion with participants after they went through the process. (see Fig. 4.3)

Queue area At the entrance of the queue participants will encounter the rearrange instruction on a poster (see Fig. 4.4). At that moment another customer (one of the researchers), is standing in front of them in line, who then goes towards the self checkout when indicated by the guidance interface. This is done to simulate conditions of an actual queue. The participants approach the front of the queue and encounter the guidance interface, which directs them to the checkout counter.

Fig. 4.3 Introduction and post questionnaire area

Fig. 4.4 Rearranging poster in queue area 117

Data Prototype experiencing area After entering the self-checkout area, participants will interact with our prototype of the redesign of the selfcheckout (see Fig. 4.5). It contains a 27â&#x20AC;&#x2122; touch screen, a scanner, a pin-machine, receipt slot and some IKEA bags for packaging. A detailed description of the prototype can be found in chapter 4.

During the test we gathered qualitative data, for which we created a form that helped us report the observations during the testing and to report the participants responses during pre and post interviews. In addition a video camera captures all of the interaction the participant has with the digital and physical interface(see Fig. 4.6), that was later used for further analysis of the user test. Additional photos will be taken on smartphones by the researchers.

Fig. 4.5 Prototype experiencing area

Fig. 4.6 Screenshot of the testing video

118

Roles and different language teams

Measurement and equipment

During the test, we as researchers will take the following roles:

To help us record the data of the user test session the following equipment will be used:

- Recruiter (2 persons) The recruiter finds participants at the exit of the regularand self-checkouts at IKEA. - Facilitator (1 person) The facilitator facilitates the participant through the whole test process. He introduces the topic, explains the consent form and the scenario, asks questions during the process and conducts the interview afterwards. To create consistency between the tests, the instructions of the facilitator are written on the test protocol which can be found in Appendix 4-1.

- A fixed camera will be installed on the physical prototype to clearly record the interaction between our interface and participants. - A portable camera will be used to take pictures of the process - The screens overview sheet will be used during the post interview to aid participants in recalling their memory of the screens of the digital interface.

- Observers (2 persons) Since the testing area consists of both a queue- and a scanning area, there is one fixed observer in each of the areas in order to reduce the possible data loss caused by moving around. -Wizard of Oz (1 person) The Wizard of Oz starts in the queue acting as another customer at the start of the test, and then takes a spot behind the prototype. There he/she is responsible for controlling the screen according to the actions of participants and giving the receipt at the end of the test, thereby remaining hidden for the participant. Besides, our team is divided into two language groups in order to facilitate both Dutch and English speaking participants during the test.

119

4.1.3 Participants To make sure participants have a fresh memory of the current IKEA checkout experience, participants are recruited after just experiencing the regular self-checkout. This will make it easier for participants to make a comparison between the original and the new design.

Selection Nine (groups of) participants participated in the user test. In order to cover for most of IKEA’s customers, participants were selected from four different groups based on the persona’s shown in chapter #. In the end three individual visitors two couples, three families with kids and one of IKEA’s working staff participated (see Fig.4.7)

Fig. 4.7 Four different groups of participants including working staff at IKEA 120

Symbiotic products Participants are asked to carry their own symbiotic product such as bags, baby carriages, jackets and so on in order to be as close as possible to the real circumstances. However, we provided an IKEA family card and pin card to use during the test for all the participants

4.2 User Test Results In this chapter we will present how we transformed the data from user testing into insights in order for us to assess whether we met our design targets.

121

4.2.1 Analysis approach From observations to insights Within this user test we tested with nine (groups of) participants (see Fig. 4.8). The gathered qualitative data were analyzed and the insights that were derived, were put onto post-its. These post-its were organized based on the corresponding participant and step in the process and put together on the wall(see Fig. 4.10), which served as a basis for discussion. The insights were also categorized based on severity(see Fig. 4.9), corresponding to the post-it colour: Critical: If we do not fix this, users will not be able to complete the scenario. Serious: Many users will be frustrated if we do not fix this; they may give up. Minor: Users are annoyed, but this does not keep them from completing the scenario. This should be revisited later. Positive: Things users like about the test

Fig. 4.8 The information of 9 (groups of) participants 122

Fig. 4.9 The different colours indicate different level of severity

Fig. 4.10 User test insights organized on wall with post-its 123

4.2.2 Main insights and related evidence The insights from the post-it session are combined into five main insights. They are as follows:

The following are related quotes extracted from the video of the test:

Insight #1 - Effectiveness of the ‘rearrange instruction’ Participants (3 out of 4 participants who used a trolley were able to rearrange the products well in their trolley and this resulted in a more fluent scanning experience at the checkout desk. However, for participants with bags (4 participants) it was impractical to rearrange the items, so no extra benefits were found there. Hence this function only benefits customers with a trolley, see Fig. 4.11.

“Yeah I like it because I think it’s smart to prepare yourself while waiting...” (family with kid and trolley) “No, I think it doesn’t help, I would rather put my stuff on the platform when I am at the station...” (couple with shopping bag)

Fig. 4.11 The rearrange instruction only benefits customers with a trolley 124

Insight #2 - Clear digital interfaces 4 out of 9 participants perceived the digital interfaces as simple, clear and with a comforting colour scheme. Functionalities within the screens also worked: the pictures of products in the scanning list were for instance checked by participants to see whether they scanned the right products. However, 4 out of 9 participants did try to scan their IKEA family card at the payment machine. This confusion was probably the result of some unclarity in the visual instruction of the digital interface. See Fig. 4.12.

And the following are related quotes extracted from the video of the test: “I think the options in the screen is simpler which make it clearer and faster to use” (couple with trolley) “...The overall design is nice, it’s just that I wasn’t sure whether to swipe or scan the IKEA family card because I first saw the picture of swiping but I couldn’t find a slot to swipe it so I scanned it, and it took me a while…. ” (couple with shopping bag)

Fig. 4.12 The multiple instructions confused participants during the test 125

Insight #3 - Positioning problems with a shopping trolley 2 out of 4 participants who used a trolley had some trouble with the positioning of the trolley at the self scanner. The placement of the trolley often resulted in uncomfortable positions while scanning or made it hard to reach the product interface. See Fig. 4.13.

Insight #4 - The physical flow at the counter does not work fluently None of the participants used the slanted part of the checkout desk. Furthermore, participants packed their products in different ways. Only a few used the packing space that was intended for it. See Fig.4.14. One of the participants mentioned to think that their products might get damaged if they let it roll down the slant. Therefore, the physical flow did not work as intended. And the following are related quotes extracted from the video of the test: â&#x20AC;&#x153;...I think it will be better to have a big and flat platform to put the products when scanning...â&#x20AC;? (individual participant with trolley)

Fig. 4.13 The trolley blocked the way for participant to interact with screen during the test 126

Fig. 4.14 The packing space was not being used for some participants during the test

Insight #5 - The interface helps participants to solve the problem of broken barcode All the participants completed the scanning process successfully, thereby also solving the problem with the barcode. They solved the broken barcode in different ways: 2 out of 9 participants immediately found the ‘enter barcode manually’ option. (See Fig. 4.15) 3 out of 9 participants entered the help page, read the instruction and found the ‘enter barcode manually’ option; 4 out of 9 participants entered the help page and found the call an attendant function to solve the problem.

Fig. 4.15 Most of the participants found the way to enter barcode manually and solve the problem by themselves during the test

127

4.2.3 Design goal examination We then assessed whether our design targets were met, through the amount of instances the intended behavior occurred during the user test. This was summarized in Fig. 4.16. An elaboration of the observed behavior is categorically explained below. meaning of signs on the following table observable in all participants: ++ observable in most participants: + observable in some participants: +not observed during testing: -

128

Fig. 4.16 Table comparing the user test results with the intended interaction

Elaboration on research outcomes Design Target 1: The scanning process should be intuitive and easy to understand Intuitiveness During testing participants evaluated the process as fluent and evaluated the digital interfaces as clear. The process here was found to be easy to complete. We noticed a higher determination between actions, where users quickly moved through the steps, indicating that all steps logically followed each other. The interaction between physical and digital interface could still be improved. Here the visuals used in the digital interface sometimes were not clear enough, leading to some confusion. Next to this when participants used the shopping trolley it sometimes hindered a comfortable interaction with the digital interfaces (Insight #3). Easy to understand (expressed through the experienced Fluency) It was apparent that the cohesion between actions was logical to participants, however it did not fit our intended interaction. Here the physical interface was not able to communicate to users, that they were able to scan and pack in one movement. Here we saw that the Unpacking area was used by all customers, however some only made partial use of the packing area and often only after scanning was finished. Finally the process was completed in a mainly linear way, indicating steps were generally clear and simple enough to do in a single run. The physical and the digital part did not go as well together as intended. The shopping trolley appeared to be hindering a comfortable interaction with the digital interfaces as can

be seen in main Insight #3. Design target 2: Users should be supported in preventing and solving problems during the use of the self-checkout Supportiveness Participants did not mention the presence of Erik (the IKEA character) as enhancing the supportive feeling of the interfaces. This might still mean that his presence unconsciously does add to the experience, but we were not able to assess this through our user test. More importantly we did see that participants were able to solve all their problems by themselves that they were supposed to solve without the support of a shopping attendant. Participants stated that they clearly knew where to find the help screen, but most participants did not access the help screen, since they solved the builtin mistake of the broken barcode without consulting any help. However when they did access the help screen, we observed that they saw this as a helpful thing, meaning their attitude towards help had improved compared to the earlier design. This was also because they were able to quickly figure out the next step, telling us the combination of visuals and text worked well. The visuals themselves only turned out to be unclear, leading to the wrong actions, as can be seen in fig. 10, below main Insight #2 Efficiency The participants did not identify any unnecessary steps within the process, meaning that they found it hard to imagine the process to go any faster. Next to this

129

4.2.4 Conclusion some participants noticed that compared to the current selfscanner they just used, they thought the process took less time. Finally as outlined in main Insight #1, the rearranging products in the queue helped participants with a shopping trolley to spend less time on scanning products, making the whole process quicker and thus more efficient.

The user test showed that the redesign quite successfully matches the intended interaction. In general the results show the experience is evaluated as intuitive, fluent, supporting and efficient. Based on the main insights and the evaluation of the design targets, we can see that the main improvements that still can be implemented are in the layout of the physical interface. Here a reconsideration should be made about the packaging area, where we saw the slant is not working. In addition we found that the interface did not guide users with a shopping trolley where to place it, which made this interaction less fluent. With regards to the digital interface we decided to improve some of the instructional images of the help pages, to avoid the confusions found during the users test. We were not able to assess the effectiveness of Erik (the IKEA character) in making the interface feel more supported. Users did not directly link him to the help page but as a decoration.

130

4.3 Final Redesign This chapter presents the final redesign and outlines the reasoning behind it. Decisions are made based on insights gathered during the instore user test conducted at IKEA Delft.

131

4.3.1 Final redesign Queue System Based on the insights from the user test as shown in chapter 2 and in depth discussion, several improvements are implemented in the final redesign. The improvements are explained in the following sections.

Most aspects of the queue system have remained unchanged from the previous iteration. The only consideration to be implemented is the use of aural cues accompanying the interfaces on the guidance screen, which many users indicated that they missed this feature in the previous design.

Rearranging poster

132

Checkout guidance screen

Fig. 4.17 Queue system

133

Physical Interface 1

Decals The checkout counter will have more usecues to help the user understand the intentions of the design. The touchpoints that provide an interaction are highlighted in yellow. The bag slot and trolley placement indicator both have decals to show their function. A sign of the counter number is present on the front and side view to improve visibility.

IKEA Family card slot In the redesign we decided to bring back the initially removed IKEA card swipe slot to accommodate all types of IKEA cards.

Level platform The scanning counter has been changed to have a bag placement slot on the left and a levelled platform encompassing the scanning and packing areas. This was done because all users have their own flow for scanning and packing their purchases. The slant was removed because it was not used by any of the test participants and took up necessary space which was missing in the packing area.

Fig. 4.18 Improved physical redesign 134

Physical flow for cart users A cart placement indicator is added to the floor of the checkout area, to give users that have a cart a placement suggestion which facilitates a good flow for an optimal scanning experience.

The checkout area Multiple lanes To ensure all users experience the same flow from left to right and keep interfaces identical we would propose to have more lanes with all checkouts facing the same way, as shown in Fig.4.16. These will be connected with passages for the attendants to navigate through. Attendant Hubs To prevent people from having a feeling of being watched or public shame, the traffic light was removed and instead there will be a centralized hub for the attendants to monitor in between the lanes. The hub displays the progress of the different self-checkouts and indicates when a checkout needs assistance. This hub is currently situated near the exits so that attendants can also quickly help customers who might have accidentally buried their receipt in their bag.

Fig. 4.19 Proposed layout of the checkout area

135

Digital interface Overall there were no major issues to be reported with the interfaces, only the scan IKEA family card interface confused users about whether to swipe or scan their card. The swiping and scanning illustrations are further separated to clarify that there are two distinct ways to use this service. (see Fig. 4.20) The other interfaces have not been edited, as they were deemed clear and functional in the prototype. An overview of the full digital interface can be seen in Appendix 4-3.

Fig. 4.20 Improved interface of family card scanning 136

137

4.3.2 Intended Interaction From all the tests and observations that were done we found that users with a bag and users with a cart have a significantly different interaction with the self-checkout. Therefore our intended interaction is geared at these two types of usage.

Queue poster The poster is especially meant for cart users, hence the poster also features a cart on the imagery.

Fig. 4.21 Intended interaction 138

Queue guidance Users are guided towards their checkout stations by the queue screen and audio instruction.

Placing products Users place their products on the designated area.

Accepting the terms All users are made aware of the terms of use.

Scanning and packing Users all have their own personal flow here, the flat top supports them in this.

IKEA card Scanning the IKEA card is encouraged and can be done in two ways: slide- and hand scanning

Payment After a final check, payment is done using a standard pin machine.

Receipt At the end the receipt is printed.

Exit All users will use the receipt to exit the gates.

139

4.3.3 Remaining design issues & recommendations During the process of creating the final redesign, we found some opportunities for improving the redesign further. These insights are not incorporated into the design, because we they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t fit with the other services IKEA provides or simply because we decided not to focus on them, but are mentioned here for inspiration and/or future use. Deleting items during self-checkout The option to delete an item a user just scanned creates a dilemma, a consideration between user experience and the risk of theft. User experience-wise it is recommendable to allow users to delete items themselves, in case they accidently scan an item twice for instance. This gives the users a feeling of control and authority and makes the process more efficient. However, in order to prevent theft, currently a shopping assistant is needed to delete an item. As this was communicated as a requirement by IKEA, in the redesign it is solved with a popup telling the user a shopping assistant will come to delete the item. However, we do recommend to further look into this issue to improve the user experience. A possible solution could be to allow users to delete an item without interference of a shopping assistant when two of the same products have been scanned. In our experience this mistake is often the reason to delete an item, and this case is less probable to be linked to theft. Personalizing the self-checkout experience An additional idea to implement in the future is to create a personalized self-checkout experience, based on the

140

IKEA Family card. In this case the self-checkout can start by asking the user to scan their Family card. Preferences can be linked to this Family card, as for instance the preferred language and agreeing to the terms. This way steps can be eliminated from the process, making it more fluent and efficient. The option arises to address the user by name and even to implement personalized discounts, as is done by for instance supermarket Albert Heijn at the moment. Alternative use for guidance screen As it currently stands, the guidance screenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sole purpose is to direct users to an available self scanner. As suggested by some users this time waiting in the line could be better utilized by showing how to use and interact with the self scanner, similar to the instruction animations provided prior to going through security at many airports. Universal IKEA Family card Using only one type of IKEA Family card (as now multiple types are being used) would allow IKEA to bring down the amount of scanner types that are necessary in a checkout station, thereby making it easier for the user. Optimizing checkout stations The redesign presented in this report works the best for users that shop with a bag. The interaction with the selfcheckout is very different for users with a shopping cart. It is worth considering to design a different kind of selfcheckout for cart users, so that they have a completely

fluent experience as well. This would also pose new questions for the implementation of the queue system. Exit of the checkout Exiting the checkout area is still a source of frustration for users, for instance if the receipt was placed in a bag or wallet inconveniently. To minimize this frustration a redesign of the exit can also be considered. Hub The hub for IKEA shopping attendants is already integrated in the current redesign. Its usability has not yet been tested though. As it proposes a change in the way shopping attendants work, this would be worth looking into.

141