Using storyboards as a tool for idea generation
Co-designing with “fill-in-the-blank” storyboards
Using my ideation framework (from last semester’s work on my thesis), I used different combinations of contexts, activities, challenges and approaches as the basis for brainstorming ideas. From these ideas, I developed three concepts that allowed me to explore different facets of the overarching problem.
The concepts were then developed into a series of storyboards to communicate pain points, proposed solutions and outcomes.
“Fill-in-the-blanks” Storyboards
Research Goals
While I had a hunch about people’s pain points and value each concept could provide, I wanted to understand what potential users thought of these ideas. In particular, I wanted to gain insight into…
- The extent to which people related to the pain points being addressed. If the problem isn’t a problem, then my efforts need to be redirected.
- The way potential users articulate the value of each solution.
- Potential users’ mental models of how these solutions would work.
Methodology
Each participant was given a copy of the following storyboards portraying a scenario that defined a pain point, solution and end outcome. They were asked to complete the storyboard by drawing and describing how the solution would work in order for it to suit their needs.
Key takeaways
What worked
The “fill-in-the-blank” storyboard method proved to be very helpful in giving me insight into which scenarios and pain points that resonated most and least with participants and dive deep into the why behind it. The storyboard was a great conversation starter that prompted participants to talk about how the scenarios presented in the storyboards related to their own life. Or, if they didn’t relate to the scenario, it served as a prompt for them to talk about how the story deviated from their experience.
Given that I was looking to validate a few ideas to eventually narrow down to a design direction, this method helped gather feedback on: 1) what aspects of the design resonated with participants, 2) how the value proposition of the solution could be strengthened to have greater impact and 3) generate new ideas or variations that solves the pain point.
What didn’t work
What this method isn’t good for is generating radically new blue sky ideas as the ideas generated tended to be constrained by the narrative laid out in the storyboard. So it is more appropriate for later in the design process, rather than early on.
Some components of the storyboards needed a little more explanation than what was written on the sheets. Since my research sessions were face-to-face, I could provide more context and answer questions from participants. If I was doing this activity asynchronously, however, I would definitely need to provide more context onto the storyboard itself or in the instructions.
