Overview

Project Context

There is always potential for improvement in the technological, social, and economic realm that is present on any college campus. But in the wake of a world-scale pandemic, the importance of hygiene has become more evident than ever. While measures such as hand sanitizing stations have been implemented to encourage frequent hand cleaning, not all germs can be killed by hand sanitizers. Visitors to UCSD need more effective and convenient ways in order to improve their hygiene on campus.

To address the problem space of hygiene on campus, our group identified many potential issues and developed a solution that would promote public hygiene. The final design of our product addresses these issues by providing a convenient and space-saving solution that separates drinking water from the sinks, thus promoting public hygiene.

User Research

Finding the problem space: What did we find were common issues?

We began our journey trying to find the problem space by brainstorming ways to improve circumstances for students on campus, such as study tools, consumer-seller transparency, or on-campus parking, etc. by using a survey to identify problems in task flow in many students’ daily routine. Through our 20 survey responses from students and faculty, we narrowed our topic down to collective hygiene in densely populated areas. We conducted targeted ethnographic research by observing students’ interactions in Price Center and other dining halls on campus, observing handwashing, the student’s location from the bathrooms, and any handwashing signage in the bathrooms. Finally, with the data collected through this observation, we conducted further interviews of UCSD students in Price Center to interact and get better insight into the practices and reasoning behind their actions.

Consolidating our research: What do our results tell us?

After gathering our research data, we utilized affinity diagrams to group our results into categories using color-coded sticky notes. These were sorted by pertinent hygiene factors and broke them down based on the level of hygiene they concerned, as well as the degree of hygiene conducted. Additionally, each group member created a user persona that encapsulated a stakeholder to allow us to empathize with the people affected by our designs.

Our project identified several key areas of focus. First, we found that densely populated areas on campus are the most unhygienic due to the sheer number of people passing by and the shortage of janitorial staff. Second, we recognize that people need to be prompted to increase their cleaning habits through authoritarian figures, posted notices, or enforced policies. Finally, we observed that individuals will avoid unclean areas and will only take it upon themselves to clean up the space if there are no clean locations available. From these 3 points, we decided to build upon the current systems of hygiene to make them more convenient and user-friendly. By doing so, we hope to maximize their potential and encourage wider adoption of these practices to create a cleaner and more hygienic environment for everyone on campus.

Ideation

What direction do we want to go in the field of hygiene?

During our project, we generated multiple ideas to tackle the hygiene issues identified in our research. After consolidating our ideas, we narrowed them down to three concepts: a trash-robot that can also clean the floor, a public sink located in a central location for easier access, and table sensors to detect when a table needs cleaning. To evaluate each concept, we generated storyboards to visualize the user experience and we discussed the pros and cons of each idea and eventually decided on the one that would be most feasible, socially accepted, and economically viable. Ultimately, this helped us develop a more focused and effective final product.

Prototyping

What will our product ultimately look like?

During our project, we faced several challenges while designing features for our new sink. We began by having each group member sketch out potential designs for the sink. During our comparison stage, we debated whether to use pedals or sensors to activate the sink, whether to combine the sink with a water fountain, and how to arrange multiple sinks in one unit. We also had to consider the placement of objects such as the soap dispenser and paper towel dispenser. Finally, to prepare for user testing, we created 3 Figma prototypes where each prototype featured a different placement or type of arrangement for the sink.

Validation Testing

Which features are the best to implement?

During our project, we conducted interviews and ABC testing (a variation of AB testing with 3 variables/designs) to gather feedback on our Figma prototypes. We walked participants through the three designs and asked for their feedback, focusing on which aspects they preferred and whether the design would address public hygiene needs. The results of the testing showed that participants preferred a separation of drinking water and the sink for sanitation purposes. We had initially considered combining multiple features to save space, but through this test, we realized this approach took us further away from our initial goal of promoting hygienic practices. Another important point was that pedals were preferred over sensors because the participants expressed how sensors are more prone to failure. Finally, the participants expressed concerns about line aggregation in models that combined a sink and a drinking fountain/water bottle refilling station. These insights helped us to refine our design and develop a more effective product that better addressed the needs of our stakeholders.

Reflection

What did I learn?

Overall, my experience on this project taught me the importance of consulting my stakeholders when creating my designs. Many design decisions are difficult to make on our own as a small group of designers, but are much easier when we draw on the multitude of perspectives and experiences our stakeholders bring. In addition, interviewing our stakeholders allows us to ultimately create a user-centric product that will truly solve their needs. Another point this project allowed me to experience was the importance of definitive decision making. When we were at our ideation stage, we had to make an executive decision in the further direction of our project. At the time it felt uncomfortable suddenly narrowing down our ideas and ignoring the rest and I had my doubts about whether we were choosing the right direction. However, in time, I was able to realize that the divergence and convergence of ideas is an inevitable part of the design process and I should embrace it full heartedly as part of the journey.

Ultimately, we were able to implement all of the features we planned for and created a site that I believe everyone was happy with.