TimeKeeper.com

1
TimeKeeper.com

• Montida Apithanakoon
• Elizabeth Gruenther
• Mindi Levine
• Jim Williams
• Justin Mandell

2
The Need for TimeKeeper

• Manager pain points in current scenario
• Too much time spent preparing/revising the weekly
  schedule
• Human errors in schedule preparation
• Lost or illegible schedule requests
• Schedule misunderstandings linked to employee
  absenteeism, lowered morale and turn-over

3
The Need for TimeKeeper

• Employee pain points in current scenario
• Need to travel to work to retrieve schedule
• Loss of shift due to schedule misunderstandings
• Not working requested hours
• No control over scheduling process

4
Current Conceptual Model

• Process is disorganized and decentralized

5
Part 1 Identifying and Understanding Our Users
6
Business Case

• Address business needs
• Reduce absenteeism due to schedule
  misunderstandings and mistakes
• Reduce time consumed by scheduling process
• Increase communication among managers and
  employees

7
Business Case

• Target Customers
• Retail Store Franchise Corporations
• Restaurant Franchise Corporations
• Cost Savings
• Store franchises can save upwards of 44,000 in
  one year

8
Primary User Constituents

• Store/Restaurant Managers
• Employees with Internet Access
• Employees without Internet Access

9
User Goals Managers

• Personal Goals
• Decrease time spent preparing weekly schedule
• Decrease time spent notifying employees of weekly
  schedule
• Simplify scheduling process
• Organize scheduling process
• Practical Goals
• Decrease employee absenteeism
• Decrease miscommunication regarding employee
  scheduling

10
User Goals Employees

• Personal Goals
• Work desired hours
• Eliminate having to travel to work to retrieve
  schedule
• Practical Goals
• Have access to employee contact information for
  shift change needs
• Have more control and input over scheduling
  process

11
User/Task Matrix
Tasks Employees Managers
Send preferred hours (hours the employee wishes to work) and weekly requests ? ?
Send long term schedule requests (i.e. when employee needs time off) and other special requests ? ?
Obtain other employee contact information ? ?
View the weekly work schedule ? ?
View schedule after schedule change/update ? ?
View entered employee scheduling preferences ? ?
View/change account information (personal contact information and password change) ? ?
View weekly announcements or notices ? ?
View help documents on how to use the system ? ?
Print the schedule(s) ? ?
View company scheduling policies ? ?
Send out notices, special requests, and announcements ?
View schedule submission lists sent by employees ?
Edit/update notices, special requests, and announcements ?
Compile possible schedules ?
Send schedule notification emails ?
Input employee information/hours ?
Edit chosen schedule ?
Finalize chosen schedule ?
View preferred schedule online ?
Edit/update company scheduling policies ?
Search for employee availability (based on set parameters) ?
Check which employees have viewed/received schedule ?
12
Manager Assumptions
We made 11 manager assumptions, some of which
included

• Current scheduling process dissatisfactory
• Current scheduling process too time-consuming
• Electronic system preferable to current system
• Managers are computer literate
• Managers have access to computers/the Internet in
  store

13
Employee Assumptions
We made 12 employee assumptions, some of which
included

• Web-based schedule submission is desirable,
  convenient and efficient
• Schedule misunderstandings contribute to employee
  absenteeism
• Current schedule retrieval method inconvenient
  and time-consuming
• Employees are computer literate
• A majority of employees have access to a
  computer/the Internet

14
Part II Testing and Validating Our Assumptions
15
Research Methods Selected

• Demographic Questionnaires
• We developed one questionnaire for both mangers
  and employees
• Questionnaires designed to gather purely
  demographic data such as stage of computer use,
  frequency of computer use, access to computers,
  etc.
• Surveys
• We developed two separate surveysone for
  employees and one for managers
• Question formats included yes/no, free response,
  and attitude measures using Likert scales

16
Research Methods Selected

• Interviews
• We developed two sets of scripted, in-depth
  interview questionsone each for employees and
  managers
• Contextual Inquiry
• Our contextual inquiry focused on managers
• The inquiry session was based on the interview
  questions, but allowed for more accurate
  responses
• LogBook
• Developed as a contingency measure for use if
  manager did not have time for a contextual inquiry

17
Research Results
We gathered user data at six separate locations

• Interviews
• 2 manager interviews
• 8 employee interviews
• Contextual Inquiry
• 1 manager contextual inquiry
• LogBook
• 1 manager logbook

• Demographic Questionnaires
• 6 from store managers
• 14 from employees
• Surveys
• 6 manager surveys
• 9 employee surveys

18
Assumption Validation Managers
Manager Assumptions Match Non-Match
Current scheduling process is dissatisfactory. ü
An electronic scheduling system would work more efficiently than a paper system. ü
Three schedule possibilities are adequate. ü
Managers create the schedule in isolation in their offices. ü
Schedule creation involves researching past sales history. ü
Managers have to approve employee shift changes. ü
Managers have to find replacements when an employee calls in sick. ü
Managers are computer literateadvanced beginner to expert. ü
Managers have a solid understanding of store policies/practices. ü
Managers have access to computers, printers, and the Internet. ü
Schedule creation takes day/time/seasonal concerns into account. ü
19
Assumption Validation Employees
Employee Assumptions Match Non-Match
Employees would use an electronic, web-based schedule submission system. ü
Employees dislike the current scheduling process. ü
Employees dont like driving or calling in to get retrieve their scheduled hours. ü
Employees submit long-term requests separately from special requests. ü
Employees must find other employees to cover last-minute shift replacements. ü
Employees understand the stores rules and scheduling practices. ü
24 hours is adequate time for employees to notify managers of employee-arranged shift changes. ü
Different staff groups submit schedule requests in different manners. ü
Schedule misunderstandings contribute to employee absenteeism. ü
Employees are basic computer users. ü
The majority of employees have Internet access. ü
The employees are literate and speak English. ü
20
Design Implications for theTimeKeeper Interface
Finding Interface
Managers need access to the current schedule at all times. The current schedule should be displayed automatically when managers log in to the system.
Managers need flexibility to edit and re-generate schedules based on updated employee input. The schedule generation function must contain as few clicks as possible, and must be very easy to operate.
Managers will need flexibility to customize the interface for their particular store/restaurant. They must be able to define scheduling rules and employee classifications easily.
The current schedule submission process for employees is short. TimeKeeper must allow employees to complete their schedule submissions as quickly as possible.
Employees disklike traveling to work to retreive their schedules. Email schedule notifications must be robust and efficient.
21
Part III Designing and Evaluating Our Interface
22
Key Interface Development Tools

• User Personas
• Research uncovered broad user categories
• To help envision our users as we developed the
  interface, we created three main personas on
  which to focus our designs

23
Key Interface Development Tools

• Workflow Diagrams
• Created diagrams to understand complicated use
  task-flows and decision making processes
• Mapped out the most critical system tasks
• Helped to determine the breadth of functionality
  for the system

24
Conceptual Model

• The ultimate goal of the TimeKeeper interface is
  to increase communication
• Scheduling process is now centralized and
  efficient
• Contrast with previous model

25
Creation of Lo-Fi Prototypes

• Step 1
• Pencil and Paper Prototypes
• Created initial drafts of interface together as a
  team
• Iterated through the pencil and paper prototypes
  several times, changing layout and terminology

Example of pencil and paper prototype
26
Creation of Lo-Fi Prototypes

• Step 2
• Illustrator Wireframe Prototypes
• Once we were satisfied with the pencil and paper
  interface designs, we created clean versions of
  the pencil and paper versions to test with users

Example of wireframe prototype
27
Usability Testing Goals/Objectives
The goal of the manager usability tests were
to determine the following

• Will managers
• Be able to figure out how to edit current
  schedule information?
• Be able to successfully generate a master
  schedule?
• Understand the difference between long-term
  availability and special requests?
• Be satisfied with the format of the master
  schedule?
• Be satisfied with their access to employee data
  when working in TimeKeeper?
• Find shift replacements easy to complete using
  TimeKeeper?
• Be satisfied with the TimeKeeper system overall?
• Trust the system to provide accurate data and
  comprehensive schedules?

28
Usability Testing Goals/Objectives
The goal of the employee usability tests were
to determine the following

• Will employees
• Be able to interpret the online schedule format
  without help from the Test Monitor?
• Understand the difference between submitting
  their availability and submitting a special
  request without help from the Test Monitor?
• Be able to figure out the three-step process for
  finding a shift replacement and submitting a
  shift change without help from the Test Monitor?
• Be satisfied with the TimeKeeper system overall?
• Be satisfied with the format of the weekly
  schedule?
• Be satisfied with the process of submitting their
  availability?
• Be satisfied with the ease of the shift change
  process?
• Be satisfied with the convenience of the shift
  change process?

29
Usability Testing Process

• Our team conducted formal, scripted usability
  tests to evaluate our product interfaces
• Testing team included Test Monitor, Computer,
  Data Logger and Observers
• Each participant asked to
• sign a consent form
• complete a series of tasks using the appropriate
  interface
• complete a Post-Test Questionnaire as an attitude
  measure after testing
• participate in a team-led debriefing session

30
Evaluation Measures

• Data collected during the usability tests
  included the following
• Sequential actions the user performed
• Number of errors in executing the task
• If task was completed successfully
• Time it took user to complete task
• User comments, body language, etc.
• User responses to post-test questionnaire

31
Results of User Testing

• Managers
• Encountered only one major difficultyfinding
  employee shift replacements
• Added explanatory text to interface
• Employees
• Encountered small difficulties that required
  changes in the interface terminology
• Major change involved the submission of long-term
  availability changed layout of interactive form
  for this task

32
Results of User Testing
Manager Responses to Post-Test Questionnaire Agreement/Acceptance
It was easy to view and print the current weekly master schedule. 100
The online schedule format was easy to understand. 80
It was easy to create a master schedule using the system. 90
It is a good idea to separate long-term schedule availability information from one-time special schedule requests. 90
It was easy to approve/deny employee special schedule requests. 80
It was easy to find shift replacements using the system. 60
Using an automated scheduling tool would reduce scheduling errors. 90
If TimeKeeper were implemented at my work, I would enjoy using it. 80
The TimeKeeper website would provide a more effective method of creating/managing the weekly schedule than my current method. 90
Overall, the TimeKeeper site was easy to use. 90
33
Results of User Testing
Employee Responses to Post-Test Questionnaire Agreement/Acceptance
It was easy to view and print my weekly schedule. 100
The online schedule format was easy to understand. 90
It was easy to submit my long-term schedule availability. 75
It is a good idea to separate long-term schedule availability information from one-time special schedule requests. 95
It was convenient to search online for an employee to cover my shift. 95
It was easy to find another employee to cover my shift. 95
I would prefer submitting my work schedule online, as opposed to my current method. 80
If TimeKeeper were implemented at my work, I would enjoy using it. 80
The TimeKeeper website would provide a more effective method of submitting/retrieving work schedule information than my current method. 90
Overall, the TimeKeeper site was easy to use. 80
34
Creation of Hi-Fi Prototypes

• Hi-Fi prototypes created in Macromedia
  Dreamweaver MX 2004
• All elements evaluated in lo-fi prototype
  implemented in hi-fi prototype
• All interactions simulated/hard coded to give the
  appearance of a fully functional website
• Color palette neutral, muted to allow for future
  customer customization

View Employee Version
View Manager Version
35
Next Steps

• Perform usability testing on hi-fi prototype
• Refine designs as needed
• Code fully functional interface
• Test/Debug functional interface
• Implement/customize interface for new TimeKeeper
  customers

36
Conclusions

• Our user research has demonstrated that
  TimeKeeper is
• Innovative
• Needed
• Effective
• Both the concept of the system and the system
  itself tested well with users
• Managers and employees indicated they would be
  extremely interested in using a system such as
  TimeKeeper
• We are confident that TimeKeeper will yield a
  maximum return on investment

37
Questions?