Marriott International

After successfully completing the research phase of the Marriott call center application project, Matter was awarded another phase of work to strategize and conceptualize the application organization and determine the application user interface design direction.

The strategy phase was a three-month initiative that explored new configurations of features, as well as new and existing processes for potential future solutions for the new reservations application. The new recommended features, content, and processes that inspired and drove the strategy and concept development were the results of the previous research phase, which were in turn heavily influenced by the direct input from customers and reservation agents. At this stage of our design process, we became proxies for those customers and users. Defining strategy and concepting ideas is a unique opportunity to safely explore new ideas before scope is finalized and actual implementation begins. This means freely examining solution options that push the limits of technology, expand people’s conceptions, and move design conventions into directions other than what is currently known.

This expeditionary work allows the team to ask “what if?” and generate numerous ideas that might never be possible within the constraints of current systems or processes. It is often the case that many visionary ideas extend too far into the future and are not feasible for a “next” product release, but these ideas still have value. The bigger ideas can be used to define a long-term vision for product development and inform the creation of a development roadmap for future releases. Additionally, some of these big ideas may include strongly desired improvements in functionality, simpler versions of which could be practical for immediate implementation.

The value of strategy and concepting activities is mitigating risk to the efficiency and effectiveness of the system through user-centered design. By exploring a range of ideas as representational prototypes, business leaders, researchers and designers ascertain what features and functionality will be successful, thereby minimizing unnecessary and costly trial-and-error development. Strategy work is purposefully aspirational and exploratory, to be later refined by the user population and business and technology teams. Business and technology teams benefit from the opportunity to consider concepts of varying degrees of complexity without committing to anything prematurely.

Once the relative benefits and risks of each concept and strategy are properly assessed, an informed decision can be made as to which direction (or aspects thereof) will be designed and developed. Another key aspect of risk mitigation lies with user participation—in this case, contact center specialists. We also use a concept test with actual system users to gauge their reactions to the ideas under consideration and solicit input for improvements. The vetting of the conceptual ideas with users provides the opportunity to confirm that development is proceeding down appropriate paths while ensuring the solution will meet and exceed users’ expectations. It also provides valuable insight into the level of acceptance and adoption that can be expected once the product is finally released.

The term “concept” can be a little unclear. For our purposes, a concept can be anything that effectively represents a future state of the system user experience. We use the word to describe specific feature ideas, ways to group features, and notions of a changed user experience. In a concept, we address all these things, so we try to use clarifying language to distinguish between the use of “concept” in reference to specific interface elements, organizing principles, and big ideas. Aspects of a concept can be any or all of the following; new process flows, lists of new functions and features or new organizations thereof, descriptions or examples of new content and categories, illustrations of new navigation conventions, sketches of new interfaces, descriptions of new customer and specialist experiences, scenarios, imagery, photography, or color. All these aspects have in common the purpose of painting a clear picture of a new solution and what users will experience using it. This phase of our project explored all these aspects to varying degrees and focused on key representations for the concept test.

The remainder of this case outlines the details of the concept test, the results, and the recommendations for proceeding into design. A key component of this phase was to gather user input and feedback on the concept directions the team created. This was accomplished through the use of a concept test with current users of the system. These concept tests consisted of conversational, exercise-driven interviews to both validate concept directions and identify potential problems. This type of research is typically conducted in a lab or isolated environment and involves a sample of participants, in this case, 16 reservation specialists. Each testing session lasted about two hours. The test itself focused on the themes of exploration of visual preferences (color choices, visual style, imagery style), evaluation of three concept directions (three very different new workflows and processes, new interface presentation ideas, new content ideas, navigation models, and interface conventions and behaviors).

The research team employed a qualitative methodology that included the techniques of interviews (including verbal dialogues and facilitated activities conducted “in context” where participants work and often incorporate exercises such as tours, card sorts, mappings, and inventories), voting exercises (participants vote for style and concept directions by placing sticky notes on posters while researchers ask probing questions about how and why specific choices are made), and collaborative design (participants use index cards to construct an interface based on their own interpretation of an idealized workflow). In addition to soliciting direct feedback on the style and concept directions, there was also the need to gather information about how ready and willing specialists would be to accept and adopt the different solutions.

There was a concern that the more extreme concepts, with their additional job responsibility and cognitive load placed on reservation agents, would be perceived as a big negative to those agents. Adoption of the new system was a key business need, so validation and measurement of the level of anticipated adoption was important.

As the concept testing proceeded, there was a strong buzz throughout the office. Reservation agents were enthusiastic about being given a chance to participate in the formation of the design of the solution, a side benefit in increased morale for the company.

Our testing and subsequent analysis determined that over 85% of the participants selected the most advanced concept as the preferred concept direction. As each direction was discussed, the participants’ excitement and eagerness would continue to build until finally it was almost a forgone conclusion that this most forward thinking direction was the only choice. Participants characterized the direction with phrases like “more is better,” “this gives me everything,” and “wow.” It was understood that this direction represented a fundamental shift in the participant’s responsibilities, beyond reservations, but despite this shift, participants were very supportive of the concept. And while the overall feedback was positive, many challenges were identified that were captured and retained for analysis.

And even though the most advanced concept was ultimately chosen, all three of the concepts were well received. Participants were instantly excited by the initial concept direction and could not believe that anything could top it. Then, the second concept would change their minds, and the advanced concept was consistently seen as the pinnacle. All three concept directions were seen as marked improvement over the current system and processes. A couple of the striking comments specifically about the concepts included “godsend” and “I’m using a shoe to pound in this nail – if you’re going to give me a hammer, I’m going to use it.” Of particular note was how most participants felt they were already doing what the first two concepts supported, but that they were doing it “the hard way.” In their minds, using either of these two concept directions would actually have a positive impact on their job, making them more efficient and more likely to convert on calls and reduce call times.

From the research phase of the project, Matter knew that guests expected the level of service represented by all three concept directions. It was also clear from the research and strategy/concept findings that all types of reservation agents fully embraced and accepted the directions represented across all three concept directions, with a strong preference for the most advanced concept. The application user interface recommendations were designed to accommodate any and all aspects of all three concepts, and allow for a phased rollout of features, functionality, and content over time, at the pace required by technology build-outs and business change management initiatives.

So, the last step of this phase was to reconcile these findings and designs with the needs and constraints of the business, which Matter provided in its final documentation and a series of workshops with key project owners and executive stakeholders.

The results of this phase of the project were threefold:

1. The business embraced the Matter conceptual strategies as a roadmap for the evolution of their business into the foreseeable future
2. The strategic and tactical implications of that roadmap were made tangible and actionable to the executive team leading the initiative
3. A decision was made to proceed to the next step, with Matter continuing their work to complete detailed design of the user interface for the new reservation application