User Experience in Agile Development

🌻 Value Mapping For UX and Product Teams (https://lnkd.in/epqF6ca3), how to set up a shared record of the outcomes the team believes a product must deliver to meet user needs and yield sustainable business value — visualize in a hierarchy of relationships between UX work and business goals. By Peter Lewis. Value mapping reference (PDF): https://lnkd.in/eaVEYF5e Full value mapping (PNG): https://lnkd.in/ecA7gpH7 Good products rarely happen by accident. No business can be successful without successful customers, and so the better we understand what value we need to deliver to customers, the better the business outcomes — and strategic advantage will be. Peter suggests to explore different levels of zooming between larger business outcomes and core functionality. We move between specific features based on user needs to feature categories to product value to business outcomes. It starts with the ultimate, vision of what the product’s key value for end users actually is. It might be shaped by the business, or we might define it with the business. Once we identified it as a Northern Light for our work, we can work towards it. At each level, we focus on 3 broad areas: 🔵 Customer outcomes 🟣 Business outcomes 🟢 New product solutions We keep the overview high-level. Once we know what customer outcomes we need to prioritize (ideally research would inform that), we can break out into ideation sessions and explore specific features and changes we want to add to the product. Peter suggests to start where you and your team currently are, not where you would like to be. Personally though, I tend to start from the 2 sides: building up a tree from top to bottom (breaking down business goals) and then eventually shifting to the bototm (and building up from UX research). While I might disagree with a few points such as starting with a solution, I do love Peter’s point on clarity and alignment being the most significant value of the mapping. It gives the team a clear point of reference of what we are doing, why we are doing it, and how we believe we are carrying the value forward. Design has a tremendous impact on business — it’s just very often it seems to be almost impossible to visualize the flow of that impact well. The value mapping created in a workshop with designers and stakeholders might help with just that. If you'd like to dive deeper into the topic, I've also put together “How To Measure UX and Design Impact” (https://measure-ux.com), a friendly practical guide on how to visualize the incredible impact of your incredible design work. #ux #design

Product designers learned the ROI on UX design decades ago. Why haven't we applied it to meeting rooms? UX design delivers remarkable ROI. Research from Forrester shows every £1 invested in user experience returns £100 - a 9,900% ROI. Design-centred companies outperformed the S&P by 228% over a decade, according to the Design Management Institute. Yet in AV, we're still debating whether UX matters. The Meeting Room Paradox. Organisations invest millions in meeting room technology. Yet Barco's 2023 research found that 60% of employees cite ease of use as their primary concern about meeting room tech. Studies indicate that up to 15% of meeting time gets wasted due to outdated or inefficient technology. The Push/Pull Problem Here's where AV strategy becomes critical. Most meeting room projects follow a PUSH model: vendors pushing solutions, IT pushing deployment schedules, procurement pushing budget constraints. Technology determines the experience. UX design reverses this to a PULL model: user needs pulling design decisions. What must folk actually accomplish? What frustrates them? How do they work naturally? Research shows organisations waste more than one-third of transformation investments on projects that fail to meet goals. Isn’t it interesting how uncurious organisations are about researching hard data as to the effectiveness of multi-million tech spends? The Strategic Choice. Does your organisation have an AV strategy? Not equipment lists or vendor relationships - an actual strategy connecting technology investments to measurable business outcomes? Those not making the choice by default are equipment installers, not experience designers - PUSH-driven, not PULL-driven. AVIXA's forthcoming UXD4AV standard (which I'm a co-author with Adam Banks) provides the framework to flip this dynamic. It provides user research and discovery methods plus iterative and prototyping phases enabling creation of performance specifications from which then - and only then - we can translate into technical specifications. It measures success by adoption rates and task completion, not installation checklists. The ROI case is clear: design-led organisations outperform equipment-led ones by orders of magnitude. The Transformation. UX for AV isn't about prettier interfaces. It's about systematic design thinking that ensures your technology investments actually deliver value. It's the difference between rooms folk prefer to avoid and rooms that make the office worth the commute. Adam Banks and I run courses, coaching and consulting on UX Design for AV, as well as our wider consulting using the EASE (Environment, Audio, Screens and Equity) framework used at Microsoft Boot Camps. My bi-weekly newsletter 'Industry Standard' explores subjects such as these. Subscribe: https://lnkd.in/ekQ3AdCb What's driving your AV strategy - technology vendors or user needs? #UX4AV #microsoftteamsrooms #avtweeps #EASEmethodology #avusergroup #ltsmg #schoms #avixa

💡UX Honeycomb in product design UX Honeycomb is a framework created by Peter Morville to help teams create products that provide a comprehensive and satisfying user experience. It consists of 7 facets that contribute to a well-rounded UX: 1️⃣ Useful The product should fulfill a need or solve a problem for the user. ✔ Ensure the product design is informed by well-defined goals that address the real user's needs. Use jobs to be done to inform design decisions: https://lnkd.in/dcWhrW4x  ✔ Continuously improve the product based on user feedback and evolving needs. Practical tips on building user research from scratch: https://lnkd.in/d_AKWnZZ 2️⃣ Usable The product should be easy to use and navigate. ✔ Maintain consistency in design patterns, colors, fonts, and interface elements. ✔ Use clear labels and logical hierarchy when crafting the navigation experience.  ✔ Bake usability testing in your design process early on. Popular templates for usability testing: https://lnkd.in/dZERHuMh 3️⃣ Desirable The product should be appealing and evoke positive emotions through its design. ✔ Use the Aesthetic-Usability effect. Invest in creating a visually appealing design that aligns with the brand's identity and the aesthetic presence of your target audience. ✔ Use elements that evoke positive emotions, such as fine-crafted animations. 4️⃣ Findable Information within the product should be easy to find. ✔ Clear information architecture design. Organize content according to the user mental models (https://lnkd.in/d4d4EmvR) so users can easily find what they are looking for. ✔ Use consistent terminology and labels throughout the product to avoid confusion. 5️⃣ Accessible The product should be accessible to people with disabilities. ✔ Adhere to standards such as the WCAG to ensure the product is accessible to all users. Check accessibility testing in Figma: https://lnkd.in/dRfM_tKM  ✔ Test the product with screen readers and other assistive technologies to ensure compatibility. 6️⃣ Credible The product should be trustworthy and reliable. ✔ Avoid misleading or exaggerated claims. ✔ Ensure that user data is well protected. 7️⃣ Valuable The product should provide value to the user and the business. ✔ Clear value proposition. Communicate the product value to the users before they start using your product; highlight how the product meets their needs or solves their problems. ✔ Ensure that the product aligns not only with the user but also with the business goals. Use HEART framework to measure UX: https://lnkd.in/e9in2H-3 #UX #productdesign #design #uxdesign #ui

One of the best ways to align teams, stakeholders, and strategy is to make the invisible visible. That’s why I’m such a fan of mapping techniques. They help you zoom out, focus in, and uncover the things that are often hiding in plain sight. Whether it’s unclear goals, conflicting priorities, or pain points users are quietly putting up with. Here are 7 mapping techniques I keep coming back to and how I use them in delivery: 🗺️ User Story Mapping Helps me turn flat backlogs into something visually dynamic, tangible, and user-focused. I use this to map out a user's journey step by step, then slice features based on what really matters to them. It’s a brilliant way to align teams around MVPs and delivery releases. 🗺️ Impact Mapping Just like Simon Sinek this one starts with why. It links business goals to user behaviors and potential features, helping teams focus on outcomes over outputs. I’ve used it to reframe entire product roadmaps around expected impact instead of a list of things to build. 🗺️ Wardley Mapping This is more strategic and it's great for mapping components of a system by how visible they are to users and how mature they are. It’s helped me spot where we should innovate, where we can standardise, and where buying makes more sense than building. 🗺️ Dysfunction Mapping I use this when things feel off, but the problem or solution isn’t immediately obvious. It’s a structured way to identify root causes of delivery friction whether it’s misaligned priorities, unclear ownership, or recurring blockers. Great for retros and recovery plans. 🗺️ Stakeholder Mapping Simple but powerful. I use this to understand who’s influencing the project, who needs to be kept in the loop, and who we might be unintentionally leaving out. It’s especially useful when stepping into a new team or navigating complex stakeholder landscapes. 🗺️ Experience Mapping This is about stepping into the user’s shoes and walking through their journey. Not just where the product touches them, but where the experience begins and ends. I’ve used this to uncover gaps, friction points, and opportunities we hadn’t considered. 🗺️ Empathy Mapping When we’re trying to build something truly user-centric, empathy mapping helps us understand what users think, feel, say, do, and hear. It goes deeper than roles or personas and helps teams emotionally hook in with the people we’re building for. If you’re in delivery, product, UX, or transformation work there’s probably a mapping method in here that can help you in your day to day role. Let me know if I've missed any effective mapping techniques and if a deep dive into any of these would be useful!

Do you really know who you're designing for? It's easy to bucket users up into the same user type and talk about them as if they're all the same person We say things like: Our users are Patients and Doctors. Patients need XX, Doctor's pains are YY But one patient isn't the same as another. So why do we design like they are? Or, often the user stays the same, but they shift between different states (sometimes within the same day) depending on their context. For example, I might cook for myself at lunch, but cook for my family at dinner. I'm the same person, using the same app, but I have different needs. Considering and designing for the the needs / goals / pain for the overall user type starts to feel generic, and disconnected from the world people actually experience That's why I like to use lenses. (It's a way of considering things from different perspectives). Each lens includes a description, needs, behaviours, emotions, pains and a key principle to remember For me personally, using lenses feels less static and more representative of the fluidness of designing for people on the other side of the glass Going back to the cooking example, the user type might be "at-home cooks" but we can break it down into multiple lenses. Some lenses we might have are: → By social context: solo lens vs family lens → By emotional state: The mid-week panic → By experience level: Learning / low confidence lens → By environment: Small kitchen lens vs well equipped There will naturally be overlaps in lens needs, for example, someone that's high confidence cook might also have a well equipped kitchen. Or the family lens might be linked to the mid-week panic. The great thing is how to see where needs overlap and where there's additional needs or conflicts. That way, we can be more intentional about how we're designing Here's a few ways I like to use lenses: → In journeys to see how needs change across contexts → When designing to see where the design works / fails → When scoping to see overlaps / conflicts in needs → In research prep to guide around different contexts → When testing to consider different states & scenarios → In design reviews to challenge our assumptions → When scoping to consider what we will / won't explore

User experience surveys are often underestimated. Too many teams reduce them to a checkbox exercise - a few questions thrown in post-launch, a quick look at average scores, and then back to development. But that approach leaves immense value on the table. A UX survey is not just a feedback form; it’s a structured method for learning what users think, feel, and need at scale- a design artifact in its own right. Designing an effective UX survey starts with a deeper commitment to methodology. Every question must serve a specific purpose aligned with research and product objectives. This means writing questions with cognitive clarity and neutrality, minimizing effort while maximizing insight. Whether you’re measuring satisfaction, engagement, feature prioritization, or behavioral intent, the wording, order, and format of your questions matter. Even small design choices, like using semantic differential scales instead of Likert items, can significantly reduce bias and enhance the authenticity of user responses. When we ask users, "How satisfied are you with this feature?" we might assume we're getting a clear answer. But subtle framing, mode of delivery, and even time of day can skew responses. Research shows that midweek deployment, especially on Wednesdays and Thursdays, significantly boosts both response rate and data quality. In-app micro-surveys work best for contextual feedback after specific actions, while email campaigns are better for longer, reflective questions-if properly timed and personalized. Sampling and segmentation are not just statistical details-they’re strategy. Voluntary surveys often over-represent highly engaged users, so proactively reaching less vocal segments is crucial. Carefully designed incentive structures (that don't distort motivation) and multi-modal distribution (like combining in-product, email, and social channels) offer more balanced and complete data. Survey analysis should also go beyond averages. Tracking distributions over time, comparing segments, and integrating open-ended insights lets you uncover both patterns and outliers that drive deeper understanding. One-off surveys are helpful, but longitudinal tracking and transactional pulse surveys provide trend data that allows teams to act on real user sentiment changes over time. The richest insights emerge when we synthesize qualitative and quantitative data. An open comment field that surfaces friction points, layered with behavioral analytics and sentiment analysis, can highlight not just what users feel, but why. Done well, UX surveys are not a support function - they are core to user-centered design. They can help prioritize features, flag usability breakdowns, and measure engagement in a way that's scalable and repeatable. But this only works when we elevate surveys from a technical task to a strategic discipline.

Recent debate in the world of design finds ourselves confused between design as personal choice or the product of a well calculated UX strategy. It’s tempting to lean on aesthetics that feel “right” or ideas that align with personal taste. But when designing for business, it's crucial to look beyond what we like and focus on what works. Here’s why aligning design choices with KPIs and UX metrics drives results. Imagine designing a user interface based purely on color schemes we love or animations that feel fun. While personal style brings creativity to the table, it often lacks a strategic focus. For example, a designer might feel that an intricate navigation system looks sleek. But if UX metrics reveal high abandonment rates at navigation points, that “cool” design is clearly not resonating with users. Here, usability should trump aesthetics every time. KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) and UX metrics – like conversion rates, task success rates, or time-on-task – are not just data points. They’re our users’ voices, telling us what they need and expect. When a design aligns with these metrics, it speaks directly to user behavior and business objectives. This is where real value is created. Let’s prioritize intuitive, data-driven design that serves the user and meets business goals. Personal taste may spark inspiration, but data is what drives sustainable impact. Design that’s user-centered, measurable, and flexible isn’t just visually appealing; it’s strategically valuable. So, next time you face a design decision, ask yourself: Is this about personal taste, or does it align with key metrics? The answer might just change the way you design. 💡 #DesignThinking #UserExperience #UXMetrics #KPIs #ProductDesign

Agents Meet Use Cases When building AI products, I've learned clarity around the user journeys matters far more than technical sophistication. If we don't align AI agents to real user needs, we risk building expensive software that doesn't solve meaningful problems. Here are some common AI agent types with use cases: Rule Based Agent: Executes actions using straightforward, predefined rules. Imagine your email inbox automatically prioritizing messages from your boss, creating tasks, or flagging urgent emails that need immediate attention. Context Aware Agent: Adapts based on what's happening around it. A robotic vacuum learns your home's layout, becoming more efficient every day. Goal Driven Agent: Focuses on completing tasks to achieve clear outcomes. For example, a meeting agent scheduling meetings by considering everyone's calendars, and personal preferences. Utility Driven Agent: Evaluates multiple factors to make the best possible decision. Imagine an intelligent expense report agent automatically capturing your expenses from emails and other unstructured data, categorizing spending, checking company policies, and flagging issues for your review. Adaptive (Learning) Agent: Improves continuously by learning from user interactions. Netflix is a perfect example: recommendations become more personalized each time you watch something new. In short, great AI solutions aren't defined by technological complexity, but by thoughtfully understanding the people we're building for. The closer we align AI to real human needs and behaviors, the more impactful and genuinely useful our products become.

A new, beautiful website won’t fix a broken experience. Yet too often, website redesigns start with aesthetics: new fonts, updated colors, professional images. It takes weeks of back-and-forth to get the approval. Looks better? Maybe. Performs better? Not always. What’s missing is the customer. Without understanding how users behave on your current website, what stops them from purchasing, and what drives buying decisions, all the effort might be wasted. Here’s how a redesign should be approached: • Start with data → Review analytics, heatmaps, and behavior flows • Listen to users → Conduct surveys, interviews, and usability tests • Identify friction → Spot where users struggle or bounce • Prioritize change → Focus on impact, not opinion • Test before launching → A/B test key elements to avoid guesswork • Iterate → Use results to refine continuously The outcome should be a site that converts more, teaches you about your customers, and informs your broader strategy. It should align with what your customers need.