Streamlining information access for Ecological Practitioners.
Project Overview: During this capstone project with William & Mary University, our team explored how a centralized digital platform could better support ecological practitioners in accessing and managing conservation resources. Through user research and iterative design, we developed a platform featuring an interactive map, conservation database with accessible tutorials and verifiable information, and a community discussion forum.
Target Users: Ecological practitioners
My Responsibilities:
Conducted user research
Developed user personas & User flows
Designed prototypes
Facilitated usability tests
Developed UX reports documenting project progress, research, and design decisions
Team: 7 Undergraduate Students
Timeline: 8 Months
Tools: Figma, Miro
The Problem
Ecological practitioners need a more streamlined way to access reliable information and resources, often relying on multiple platforms and feedback from colleagues to support their research.
However, existing platforms lack centralized information and opportunities for practitioners to connect and communicate with one another.
How Might We
How might we create a space where ecological practitioners can share knowledge, learn from one another, and build connections within the conservation community?
Initial Goal
Create a centralized information hub for ecological practitioners
Support knowledge sharing and communication amongst practitioners
Provide reliable and credible resources
Research and Discovery
Competitive Analysis
We analyzed five competitors to gain a better understanding of the existing browser landscape, identify opportunities for differentiation, and uncover areas for improvement within current browsing experiences
Browsers analyzed: Wild Labs, Bon in a box, U.S. Climate Resiliance Toolkit, Conservation Standard and Panorama solutions.
Key Insights:
Search & Filtering: Users benefit from straightforward navigation and robust filtering options when navigating through large amounts of information
Infomation Overload: Sites with multiple navigation paths and large amounts of content can cause confusion and make it hard to identify relevant information
Community & Connection: Existing sites provide limited opportunities for users to communicate, making it difficult to network
Information Organization: Intuitive naming schemes and simple category systems make it easier to locate and understand information
Visual Engagement: Many conservation sites rely heavily on text and lack visual elements creating opportunities to make information more engaging and digestible
Primary Research
During our generative research, we conducted 6 semi-structured interviews with ecological practitioners across North America to understand their goals, daily tasks, frustrations, communication methods, tools, and information needs.
We also reviewed existing survey data from 128 participants provided by the client. However, because the survey included participants outside our target user group, we used the data to reinforce and validate insights gathered through our interviews.
Key Insights:
Centralized Information: Users rely on multiple sources to access necessary data. Limited online data often forces them to rely on less familiar or unreliable sources
Region-specific data: Accessing information specific to a practitioner’s region, ecosystem, and species is vital for informed decision-making, but can be challenging to find
Communication & information sharing: Efficient communication and information exchange are crucial for conservation progress. However, organizations sometimes withhold research, impeding collaboration and collective learning
Information credibility: Practitioners rely on research, case studies, and reports, but online information can be disorganized or unreliable.
Fig. 1 Affinity Map of Research Findings
Personas
Using an affinity map to organize insights from our user interviews, we developed three personas to represent the different needs and experiences of ecological practitioners. These personas helped us keep our target users at the centre of our design decisions.
Fig. 2. Personas
Journey Maps
Our journey maps explored the different goals and challenges faced by ecological practitioners, from finding relevant content to engaging broader audiences and maintaining up-to-date information. These helped us identify opportunities to better support practitioners across different aspects of their work.
Fig. 3. Journey Maps
Design Process
Ideation
The team generated ideas together based on our research findings, and prioritize concepts based on user needs, client requests, feasibility, and the project timeline.
Design Goals
Our design goals were guided by the client's original vision of the Integrative Conservation Clinic and our research findings. We focused on providing practitioners with a centralized platform for finding information artifacts. These goals helped guide our design decisions and prioritize the features explored throughout the project.
01
Reliable & Credible Information
Provide a reliable, credible, and up-to-date database that evolves as new findings are discovered and can be easily updated.
02
Community Collaboration
Encourage practitioners and partners to share findings, discuss experiences, and connect with other professionals in the field.
03
Intuitive Information Search
Provide intuitive ways to search for information through location-based searching, filters, keywords, and categories.
04
Multiple Ways of Consuming Information
Provide video tutorials and curated summaries for users who want to quickly access and consume information.
Prototyping and Testing
Testing Methods
We conducted 3 rounds of usability testing with ecological practitioners and client-provided testers. A Wizard test was conducted during the first round, while participants interacted directly with a prototype during the second and third rounds. Task-based testing was conducted across all three rounds.
The think-aloud protocol was used throughout all rounds to understand the participants' thought processes and to identify usability issues. Sessions were recorded and documented by a designated note-taker, allowing us to analyze recurring issues and refine the prototype.
Testing Goals
Usability: Users experience 2 or fewer errors while completing tasks
Learnability: Users understand how to navigate the system
Task completion: Users can successfully complete the tasks
Usability Tasks
We created 3 task-based scenarios focused on the interactive map, discussions, and report page structure. Tasks were evaluated as Pass, Indirect, or Fail, while usability issues were assessed based on severity and frequency. Participants were also asked follow-up questions to gather further insights.
Example Scenario:
You have been assigned to conduct conservation fieldwork in southern Ontario and you want to find different approaches being used in the area
Participants
Round 1: 5 participants
Round 2: 5 participants
Round 3: 5 participants
Low-fi Prototype
This prototype was evaluated during Phase 1 of our task-based testing.
Fig.4 Low-fi prototype
Mid-fi Prototype: Iteration 1
This prototype was evaluated during Phase 2 of our task-based testing.
Fig.5 Mid-fi Prototype: Iteration 1
Mid-Fi Prototype: Iteration 2
This prototype was evaluated during Phase 3 of our task-based usability testing.
Fig.6 Mid-Fi Prototype: Iteration 2
Key Findings and Refinements
Navigation & Terminology
Finding
Participants had difficulty understanding the intended purpose of some navigation titles.
Refinement
Navigation titles were altered to better communicate their intended purpose.
Interactive Map
Finding
Participants appraciated the location-based search, but many did not find value in including strategy reports. They primarily wanted to use the map to discover location-based case studies.
Refinement
Map was refined to omit strategy reports.
Bookmarked Content
Finding
Participants liked being able to categorize bookmarked content into custom folders, as they believed it would help them retrieve content.
Refinement
Custom bookmarks were incorporated to help users organize and retrieve saved content.
Information Architecture
Finding
Testing revealed issues with the information archtecture and seperation of content through backgrounds, approaches, and tools.
Refinement
The architecture was modified to house the respective content within a single section. The upated results page also made it easier for users to find content.
Upon opening the platform, users can begin searching for content. The Resource Library allows users to search by keyword, filter results, or browse the latest content added to the site. When viewing an article, users can explore related content, read in-depth or summarized explanations, watch tutorials, bookmark the resource, report an issue, or view the latest updates.
Fig.7 Search task flow
Users can access an interactive map to explore region-specific content. Users can search for specific topics, track their location, or select areas on the map to find relevant articles. Each article result also displays related content.
Fig.8 Interactive map task flow
Upon opening the platform, users can access the Community tab through the main navigation. From the Community page, users can explore discussion topics, join existing threads, create posts, and interact with other users.
Fig.9 Discussion task flow
Next Steps
Future Iterations
Create a mobile companion app that allows users to access bookmarked convos, case studies and reports
Allow verified users to add meta tags to content to improve information organization and retrieval
Integrate shared bookmark folders
Reflection
One of the main challenges we faced was recruiting conservation practitioners to interview and test our prototypes, as many were often out in the field. To overcome this, we also tested with users who were educated in conservation and associated with our client and the project.
Another challenge was labelling the main navigation. Our client initially wanted to separate information by approaches, tools, and background, but users did not understand these titles. Due to our limited knowledge of the conservation field, we relied heavily on discussions with our client and user testing to develop clearer alternatives.
This project reinforced for me the importance of validating assumptions when designing for a field I was unfamiliar with. I learned that working closely with the client and users was essential to understanding the terminology, information needs, and expectations of ecological practitioners.
Conclusion
Our solution addresses our HMW by creating a space where ecological practitioners can share knowledge, learn from one another, and build connections within the conservation community. The platform provides access to relevant, reliable, and updated conservation information through searchable resources, an interactive map, tutorials, and suggested content. Practitioners can also share findings, discuss relevant topics, and connect with others through the community forum.
Together, these features create a centralized space for ecological practitioners to access and exchange knowledge while supporting collaboration and connections within the conservation community.
How Might We
How might we create a space where ecological practitioners can share knowledge, learn from one another, and build connections within the conservation community?
