Learning about users and validating our assumptions
Our discovery project to shape JRF online is well underway, the time has flown by since we began with our partner (Snook) in July 2020.
In doing discovery, we are defining the requirements of a renewed JRF website to deliver its strategic outcomes, whilst exploring those services that will be delivered on or accessed through the JRF website.
I’m sharing where we got to at the end of the external stakeholder research phase of our project.
At this point in the project we have recently delivered an organisation research phase, and just completed external stakeholder research.
Organisation research allowed us to establish our suspicions, that our website was not reflecting JRF’s transformation to a social change organisation. During organisation research we also discovered that partnerships is a very big part of how JRF works. Therefore, JRF’s new online offering not only needs to reflect our evolution as an organisation, but also be a strategic tool to enable and grow these connections and collaborations.
Moreover, by conducting organisation research prior to external user research, it allowed us to gather a set of assumptions about how our external users were interacting with JRF, whilst also keeping sight of our colleagues’ aims, experiences and individual viewpoints.
This gave us the foundation we needed to begin our external phase of user research — to test these assumptions, learn and gather more information through research on what our users want from JRF’s services and our online offering.
Methodology and research aim
As JRF has evolved into a social change organisation, it is of great importance that we collect the insights of external users so that they have a direct contribution towards JRF’s future online presence. More specifically, we needed to engage with a wide variety of our external stakeholders to better understand their motivations, expectations and journeys when working with JRF and engaging with our website.
To achieve this, we set up a research plan containing the research premise, scope and objectives. We had 3 main objectives:
- Our first was validating the assumptions formed during organisation research.
- Our second was to map our stakeholder’s journeys to get a clear picture of the interaction points they have with our website and other channels.
- Our third and final objective was to share elements of JRF’s evolution into a social change organisation with stakeholders. In so doing, we were able to discern if this altered their perception of JRF’s brand and services.
Interviews were the mode of speaking to our stakeholders. Between 25th August and 10th September 2020 we completed 18 remote interviews. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes, each with a blended approach of facilitated discussion.
We collected our organisation research assumptions and used them to then craft our questions for the interview guides. Each interview was slightly tailored to our stakeholder type, so that we could focus on the service they used the most, be it contacting our press office or accessing our framing training.
Using a prototype to test and learn what was and wasn’t working
We worked with our colleagues in Snook to develop a wireframe prototype, which we also used during the interviews to prompt thoughts and questions.
This was a fantastic way of getting our external stakeholders to reflect, expand on their points and share with us rich insights that are not only crucial in building our next website, but also crucial in allowing us to continue to design our services around our users.
We used the prototype a provocation tool, designed to better understand what our external stakeholders expect and want from our website. We developed 3 pages of a greyscale flat wireframe built in Figma:
- Homepage
- Research Hub
- Campaign Hub
Making research collaborative
Having gained consent from the research participant, we recorded each interview using the record facility in Microsoft Teams. Our whole research process was collaborative and at each interview we worked in tandem with Snook, with one of us interviewing and the other partner notetaking.
After completing our interviews, we then synthesised and analysed the research insights in Miro to establish our key findings.
This was a very effective way of engaging the team in user research constructively, it helped us generate consensus around our findings quickly, and ensured that everyone involved had a deeper understanding of the participants’ experience.
Our Stakeholders
We have identified seven stakeholder groups: six external and one internal. These categories are a helpful way to group needs and consider what and how services should be delivered to best meet them.
There were many ways this could have been approached, but from insights from JRF staff we have categorised them based on who JRF collaborates with by sector and activities. Within each of these categories there may be one or more types of stakeholder.
For our next phases of work, these categories will require further discussion to refine and explore how stakeholders are prioritised. This will ensure that the development of the website has the intended impact and reflects a diversity of users for it to be both accessible and inclusive.
Some challenges along the way…
Categorising our stakeholders was half the solution. Our internal analysis showed us how diverse our stakeholders were, leading to many different types of activities because our work is so targeted and personalised.
This became a challenge when we had to categorise them in order to know:
- Who to recruit for the research phase — screening participants with relevant criteria
- Which journey we needed to map to get the right insights into our services
It was crucial to get the right mapping because it shows a certain approach of how JRF interacts with its users and sets a framework for all the questions we were trying to solve. And, as it always is, half of the solution is in defining the problem well.
We quickly realised that our current category — by sector — was not powerful enough and could lead to misuse of our data. Two stakeholders from very different sectors sometimes have a similar journey with one service but their goals and what happens next diverges.
It made more sense to group them by activities or tasks — by what they do, not where they come from. Mapping stakeholders by tasks allowed us to focus on what they come to the website for, what their goal is and what JRF can offer them to best accomplish their goal.
What we found
Our interviews gave us some genuinely fascinating research findings. During synthesis, we grouped them together in two broad categories — our brand perception and service offering. These insights will not only be vital for designing the next version of JRF online, but also ensuring that our services are developed with these user needs in mind.
People understand we are changing
While our existing external stakeholders understand we are evolving into a social change organisation, they are still unclear around how they can partner with or be funded by us. As we continue to evolve, what we choose to say and ask people to do needs to sit comfortably alongside JRF’s established brand.
We are a trusted source of independent and high-quality information
Because our external stakeholders see JRF’s work as reputable and neutral, they’re comfortable in referencing it in their own work as a way to increase their professional credibility. This, in turn, helps amplify JRF’s voice and reputation.
Including the voices of those with lived experiences should help build relationships and pass power
JRF’s value is amplifying the voices of those with lived experience of poverty, helping them to be heard in places that make decisions that affect them. Not only is this perceived as another form of high-quality evidence, but it is seen as unique to JRF, helping bring issues to life. It demonstrates our role as an ally to those with lived experience.
Our framing service is trusted and valued
Through the analysis of our interviews using Miro and our workshop discussions with internal stakeholders, we gained a clearer view of what JRF services and products are and of how the website could support these in our mission to become a social change organisation.
Despite JRF’s framing service being relatively new, it is the second most popular service people come to our website for after evidence. The external stakeholders who know about it trust it and come specifically to the website to use it. They believe it is a way to help win hearts and minds in their own campaigns.
The services we offer are recognisable
People recognise the proposed navigation list in the prototype as being the services that JRF delivers. We have a good sense of what people come to JRF for. However, results were inconclusive as to whether it was better than the current navigation by topics. Information architecture and navigation will be tested further in the design and build phase following our discovery project.
Relationships with JRF staff are a key channel for tailored information
Those who have relationships with JRF staff rely on them to receive updates, support and learning resources, rather than the website or our other communication channels. This raises questions around sustainability, how we increase take up of our service offers and how we manage our relationships.
The way people use, access, and digest our information varies
Most people we interviewed came to the JRF website via Twitter or our weekly roundup newsletter. Some quickly scan a summary, while others print a full report to read later. People expect information to be available at different geographic levels, not just based on the four nations but also data and analysis at a more localised level. Providing our information in a range of formats and geographic lenses, which can be navigated from our other channels will address these varying needs.
Synthesis and workshops
During the organisation research phase of the project, we revealed that some of the insights we gathered from internal stakeholders had created a series of issues we needed to explore further. Our external user research interviews gave us some vital insights that we were able to bring back to our internal colleagues so we could work through three key issues in a series of three workshops. Together, we were able to move these areas from organisation research forwards.
What do we want to say?
This first workshop was about how JRF sharing opinions, positions, views, recommendations, and ideas may affect JRF’s perceived neutrality, and impact certain stakeholders. JRF has started being more open and clearer about its positions on policy and current affairs, but for external stakeholders there needs to be a fine balance between campaigns and evidence, to protect JRF’s well regarded neutrality.
As JRF moves into the social change space, it needs to have a very clear view of who its comparators are. This will help craft and refine JRF’s service offering against them. JRF needs to be strategic about how it cultivates its support base. There are many avenues JRF can take with campaigning which are yet to be determined internally. How many campaigns should JRF do at the same time? Should JRF have public and elite-facing campaigns across the outcome areas?
How should we share the stories of those living in poverty?
The second workshop was based on issues emerging around our work with people with lived experience of poverty. Amplifying voices, sharing stories, co-designing solutions, and providing tools for those with lived experience of poverty is JRF’s unique selling point.
We heard from external stakeholders that they value JRF’s use of lived experience stories; in our workshop we agreed that JRF could well use storytelling more widely in future across a whole host of areas, from data and evidence to policy solutions. Our external stakeholders also told us that they expected JRF to signpost to non-partisan support services for people living in poverty. Conversations will continue over the coming months, whether we decide to do this or not we need to be very clear in explaining the reasons why.
Personalisation
Our third and final workshop dealt with the issues around personalising content for JRF’s different stakeholders. As JRF represents the 4 nations, we discussed how it is important that content is tailored to the different areas where its stakeholders are based, such as bespoke data or regional newsletters. It is a short to medium term aspiration to make the experience more dynamic and interactive.
Next steps
In this phase of discovery, we have spoken to internal and external stakeholders to better understand their needs and motivations for accessing both JRF online and our service offer.
The next phase is to develop the final project documentation and will be led by Snook with support from the whole project team. We are finalising everything that we’ve learned so far and will present the final deliverable as part of a Show and Tell to the organisation.
Note: there’s going to be a final blog post on the discovery project by Snook and the discovery team. Watch this space!
