Abstract
Where ideas exist for products or features, User Experience (UX)-related aspects are usually not given enough consideration. Role-play exercises enable the implicit knowledge of experts which then can be used to identify and refine UX-related factors in product ideas. From early childhood, people use role-play to try out roles and get to know them. Their experience provides them with a more in-depth understanding for the roles and also teaches them how to interact with each other. This original learning method can therefore be applied by most people without a great deal of preparation. Personas (i. e. prototypical user) are ultimately a form of role description and are used as a launching point from which to place ourselves in the position of a user. Scenarios offer contextual information and provide a scope for the role-play exercise to move on.
1 Introduction
In product development, all persons involved (e. g. product manager, user experience designer, or developer) attempt to form an image of users. The ultimate ambition is to develop products that generate the greatest possible acceptance and enthusiasm by real users. It is challenging to evaluate product experiences early on, when they are just ideas or prototypes [2]. The use of role-play helps to see things from the user’s perspective. Role-playing is a process from which social skills and perspectives on use in a real-life environment are gained [17]. Roles can be tested and discovered, and other people’s acceptance of these roles can be increased [10]. Playing such roles enables a person to put themselves into the mindset of another person and become aware of that other person’s state of being, wishes and goals [16]. The gathered knowledge can be assigned to different assessment characteristic categories, for example in must-be, attractive and rejection characteristics according to the Kano model [13].
In the next sections we will focus on the user as a role. Then we will discuss the role-play situation and afterwards general patterns of role-play exercises. The understanding of the user as a role and of the role-play situation provides a basis for using role-play exercises while the pattern helps to develop precise role-play sessions.
2 The User as a Role
Personas are used to describe how a role is played, because they are based on actual behavioural patterns and motivations of real persons and help the development process as proxies of the user [8]. The description of a persona in a role-play scenario is an adequate aid to empathise with a typical user’s position, because they are largely equivalent to role cards in traditional role-playing scenarios. They also contain such fundamental information on the role as personal data (e. g. name, age, profession etc.), functions, biographical information, personal qualities (e. g. fundamental attitude, values, character etc.) and the initial situation (e. g. prior history, intentions etc.) [15]. The use of personas enables specifically the expectations of potential users to be accounted for, along with their emotional reactions [11]. Even just realistic personas (not resulting from real user data) help to focus on the user [14] which will give a consensual imagination for playing a role.
Other target group representations such as the Sinus-Milieus1[1] can also be used to role-play a user. The important thing is that, regardless of the nature and manner of the target group representation, the participants in a role-play exercise are offered the means to assist them in representing a role with its preferences, aversions, experiences etc. The aim is to empathise with a user for whom a product has been or is being developed.
In the case of product ideas for which only a vague concept exists, it is possible to forego a specific description of the target group. In this case, a role-play exercise is used more as an instrument for brainstorming, creating a generalised user perspective.
3 The Situation
A role-play exercise is made possible by selecting not only a role definition but also an exercise situation. User stories and scenarios are used to describe the exercise situation. User stories focus on the user’s role and relate to their background and motivations [6], through which they provide a basis that dictates their actions in the role-play exercise. Scenarios may provide more stringent requirements for the role-play scenario, meaning that there is less need to improvise, but also less scope for freedom. The usage opportunities are highly dependent on the particular scenarios. However, they can enable a user-based perspective that helps to understand the point of view of the user [1].
Storyboards in turn are only of limited use in role-play exercises due to their prescribed context and descriptive imagery. They present a usage context very specifically, image by image, much like a comic [12]. They are therefore not suitable for open-ended role-play situations, but can certainly be used to illustrate the role-play of a usage situation to other stakeholders.
4 A Pattern for Role-play Exercise
The size of role-play exercises vary between small and large groups. Small groups (2–5 participants) usually need a shorter time for warming up and evaluation but also produce a smaller range of results than bigger groups (6–30 participants). But overall, there is a typical pattern. Role-play exercises are separated into five different phases: definition, warm up, playing, finalization and evaluation.
In the following, the fictional example of an app for scanning and analysing any kind of till receipts will be used in order to make the procedure well comprehensible. This app can scan all important data and store them online. It also creates a lengthy report with an overview of many categories (e. g. living costs, expenses of hobbies, costs of traveling).
4.1 Definition
Starting with the definition, all research questions should be named and be known by participants. This initial phase shapes a common understanding what the goal of the exercise is. Furthermore, all those involved must be aware that the role-play situation must and should not have any effect on their real relationships. This is enabled by means of clearly-defined exercise rules and a noticeable closure. Although special rules are not a necessity for role-play exercises in relation to entertainment software products, a clear line must be drawn in situations which involve high stress factors (e. g. for medical equipment in life-threatening situations). In a workshop situation these rules can also be up on a bulletin board, a flipchart or something like that, to ensure that they are visible at all times.
All of the involved parties along with other indirectly affected individuals must be clearly advised that such role-play exercises are just exercises, meaning that they are not real situations. The boundaries between exercise and reality must be clearly defined [9]. Because the role-players work within a playful context, everything that they say as part of their role must also be understood to be part of the role-play scenario. Methods to facilitate this separation include addressing people under different names (e. g. the name of the roles / personas), but also by differentiating visually between the role and the person. A conspicuous element above the shoulders (for example a hat, a scarf or something similar) adequately changes how a person is perceived.
In the fictional example the main research question focus on finding attractive and rejection characteristics of the before mentioned app. The focus lies on young users who just moved out of home. To visualize this user group the participants use baseball caps.
4.2 Warm Up
To get ready for more complex role-play the participants begin to interact with each other through simple tasks like walking around or talking with each other. The participants bond with each other and create the stage for following role-play tasks. A possible warm up is to simulate a fictitious person and tell others how they arrived to the current location. This should be a quirky but possible story. Missing the train and trying to catch it horseback is a good example. With these kind of first role-play actions the participants get into the mood for playing.
4.3 Playing
While playing, there are special exercises all participants can use to get insights from the user role. In this exercises the participants focus on the concrete product, feature or idea. A trainer is highly recommended while having an exercise with many people attending, because he can help to reduce role-plays related problems. For example, it is very important to ensure a continuous stimulation, which leads to an ongoing role-play without getting stuck. Every participant gives a stimulus to keep the role-play running.
The exercises ‘Explaining in character’ and ‘Good product, bad product’ [18] are good examples of exercises for playing a user role and examine the user experience.
4.3.1 Exercise: Explaining in Character
A simple exercise helps to enable first contact with role-play exercises in product development. One moderator and between three and five participants are needed, who each takes on the role of a persona. Each persona must carry or wear a noticeable object that clearly identifies the persona that the person in question will portray (in the fictional example the baseball caps). A moderator who knows the product, idea or prototype well is also needed. All participants are provided with this product idea, the prototype or the finished product that they are to assess from the perspective of the persona. In individual exercises, they go through a given usage scenario in their mind, developing an imaginary experience scenario for that persona. In the fictional example the given scenario describes the daily shopping and the reading of the reports at the end of the month of the young user. This mental run-through is performed in silence, with the moderator remaining available to answer questions to any problems and providing assistance with additional information and explanations where comprehension issues arise. Then the actual role-play exercise begins. Each person now talks about their user experience, but remains within the role of the persona. Each person is to be allowed to speak about their user experience once without being interrupted. The advantages and disadvantages of the product are discussed in the group, but the participants still remain in the role of the persona. In the fictional example one participant could tell the others about some problems with scanning the receipts while another one could tell the others about his partner reading the report and asking many questions. If missing product requirements arise as part of the exercise, this is noted by the moderator and added directly where necessary. The exercise is finished when the opportunities for discussion about the product have been exhausted and it is no longer possible to draw new impulses from the exercise. The moderator ends the exercise.
4.3.2 Exercise: Good Product, Bad Product
The “Good product, bad product” exercise serves as an example for a more complex role-play exercise. This exercise increases the complexity of the role-play exercise by intensifying communication between the individual roles, providing a more intense emotional component and a higher need to improvisation.
The participants are given the prototype of a product or a placeholder and can utilize the previously experienced persona as a role description. This time the participants are divided into the three groups, “proponents”, “sceptics” and the moderators. In a brief preparation period conducted in silence, the participants in the proponent group each think about specific user experiences (for example based on storyboards or scenarios, but situations invented from scratch are also permitted). In the fictional example they use the known scenario describing daily shopping. The participants in this group then recommend the product to the other group. This other group assumes the roles of the sceptics, taking a sceptical position to the benefits of the product and trying to find and emphasize the negative aspects of the product. The participants need to ensure here that they do not run themselves into a dead end. Motivating factors in the exercise must be noted and new motivating factors must be introduced (in the fictional example this could be getting an overview of personal costs). Statements such as “I don’t like that” give little incentive to proceed with the exercise, while “I don’t want my data on the internet” serves as a point from which to react.
A moderator makes a note of the positive and negative points from both sides and the frequency of their occurrence, and of the emotionality of the statements made in this connection. In the course of this exercise, the moderator must also particularly ensure that the role-play experience does not impact the real relationship. Depending on the product, more intense emotions may be involved than in the “Explaining in character” exercise, especially when the participants are also responsible for the product idea in question outside of the roll-play exercise.
The outcome of this exercise will be the divisive characteristics or functions of this product. It answers the question of which characteristics or functions are to be emphasized (acceptance characteristics) and which preconceptions generate resistance (rejection characteristics).
This exercise can also be done with more people in one group (e. g. 3 “proponents” and 3 “sceptics”) while there is still only one moderator needed as long one person speaks at once. If there is more than one participant in one group it is necessary to use parallel thinking [3] to concentrate on one point of view.
4.4 Finalization
When the role-play exercise is completed, the participants are asked to step out of their roles, the physical exercise environment is taken apart and nobody is addressed by their role name (for example that of their persona) anymore [15]. In this case, we refer to the participants being “de-roled”, which helps create a perceptible differentiation between the role-play situation and the real-life relationship. In participant groups where there are noticeable difficulties, a ritual action such as encouraging all participants to clap can be used to help the “de-roling” process. In the fictional example all participants take of their baseball caps and clap to “de-role”.
4.5 Evaluation
In the end all results must be collected and put together. This is usually a task for a trainer or moderator. The summarized results will be presented to all participants as a base for a discussion. In the following discussion new insights can be found, open aspects can be discussed and open question can be answered.
5 Discussion
Role-play exercises are easy to learn and can be employed without great expense. People can slip into the role of someone else, interact with each other and use there implicit knowledge of a user behavior. Experiences of the participants can help to create ideas and build new structures fast and easy [4]. Product developers have to make quick decisions which ideas are worth to be implemented and to use opportunities [5]. Role-play exercises can fulfill this need, especially for an UX-driven product development process.
However, role-play exercises can be a problem if personas are defined too vaguely or if there is no consistent target group identity. In this case, it is likely that role-players will substitute the missing nuances with their interpretations or self-references. For example, they substitute goals, motives, abilities and mental models with their own perceptions, thereby reducing the benefit of the personas [7]. Should such difficulties arise, they can be identified by observing the role-play exercise and eliminated by revising the personas. These kinds of difficulties can also happen by using scenarios or storyboards. There situational conditions can also have some gaps like the feeling of users in a stressful situation (e. g. calling a number in an emergency). In this case, the scenarios or storyboards must be revised and updated.
It must also be noted that not every person will demonstrate adequate willingness to participate in a role-play exercise in the context of product development or improvement. Every participant must be open to and submit to the role-play situation, and not everyone is able or willing to do this. The reasons for this may vary greatly. Note that it is easier to replace the person or reduce the number of participants, than to limit the disruptive factors. Forced role-play exercises do not work, although the lead-up to them can be facilitated by warm-up acting exercises or improvisation exercises.
About the author
Dominique Winter received his master degree in Computer Science and Media Applications from the Hochschule Emden / Leer, with a thesis on estimating user experience. He worked as a product manager and product owner with a strong focus on user experience, innovation management and agile product development for different companies. Furthermore, he is a guest researcher and member of the UX research group at the Hochschule Emden / Leer.
Literature
[1] Alexander, Ian u. Neil Maiden: Scenarios, stories, use cases. Through the systems development life-cycle. Chichester: Wiley 2004.10.1049/cce:20040505Search in Google Scholar
[2] Balasubramoniam, Vignesh u. Niranjan Tungatkar: Study of User Experience (UX) and UX Evaluation methods. In: International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering & Technology (IJARCET) 2 (2013) H. 3. S. 1214–1219.Search in Google Scholar
[3] Bono, Edward de: Six thinking hats. 1. Aufl. Boston: Back Bay Books 1999.Search in Google Scholar
[4] Bono, Edward de: De Bonos neue Denkschule. Kreativer Denken, effektiver arbeiten, mehr erreichen. 3. Aufl. Landsberg, München: mvg-Verl. 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[5] Cagan, Marty: Inspired. How to create products customers love. [Sunnyvale], Calif: SVPG Press 2008.Search in Google Scholar
[6] Cohn, Mike: User stories applied. For agile software development. Boston, Mass: Addison-Wesley 2004.Search in Google Scholar
[7] Cooper, Alan, Robert Reimann u. Dave Cronin: About face. Interface- und Interaction-Design ; [die Ziele und Erwartungen Ihrer User untersuchen und verstehen ; die Methode des Goal-Directed-Designs anwenden ; Produkte entwickeln, mit denen Ihre User optimal interagieren können]. 1. Aufl. Heidelberg, München, Landsberg, Frechen, Hamburg: mitp 2010.Search in Google Scholar
[8] Cooper, Alan, Robert Reimann u. David Cronin: About face 3. The Essentials of Interaction Design. Indianapolis (Ind.): Wiley 2007.Search in Google Scholar
[9] Fritz, Jürgen: Das Spiel verstehen. Eine Einführung in Theorie und Bedeutung. Weinheim, München: Juventa-Verl. 2004 (Grundlagentexte soziale Berufe).Search in Google Scholar
[10] Fuchs, Myrna: Rollenspiele im Unterricht. [S. l.]: Grin Verlag 2013.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Holt, Eva-Maria, Dominique Winter u. Jörg Thomaschewski: Personas als Werkzeug in modernen Softwareprojekten. Die Humanisierung des Anwenders. In: Usability Professionals 2011. Hrsg. von Henning Brau, Andreas Lehmann u. a. Stuttgart: German UPA e. V. 2011. S. 40–44.Search in Google Scholar
[12] Holtzblatt, Karen, Jessamyn Burns Wendell u. Shelley Wood: Rapid contextual design. A how-to guide to key techniques for user-centered design. San Francisco: Elsevier / Morgan Kaufmann 2005.10.1145/1066348.1066325Search in Google Scholar
[13] Kano, Noriaki, Nobuhiko Seraku, Fumio Takahasi, u. Shin-ichi Tsuji: Attractive Quality and Must-Be Quality. In: Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control 2 (1984) H. 14. S. 147–156.Search in Google Scholar
[14] Norman, Don: Ad-Hoc Personas & Empathetic Focus. http://jnd.org/dn.mss/personas_empath.html (20.5.2011).Search in Google Scholar
[15] Schaller, Roger: Das große Rollenspiel-Buch. Grundtechniken, Anwendungsformen, Praxisbeispiele. 2. Aufl. Weinheim [u. a.]: Beltz 2006 (Beltz Weiterbildung).Search in Google Scholar
[16] Schaller, Roger: Stellen Sie sich vor, Sie sind … Das Ein-Personen-Rollenspiel in Beratung, Coaching und Therapie. 1. Aufl. Bern: Huber 2009 (Klinische Praxis).Search in Google Scholar
[17] Schiffler, Horst: Spielformen als Lernhilfe. Freiburg im Breisgau, Basel, Wien: Herder 1982 (Herderbücherei Bd. 9089: Pädagogik).Search in Google Scholar
[18] Winter, Dominique: Lebendige UX – Durch Rollenspiele den Nutzer darstellen und verstehen lernen. In: Mensch und Computer 2015 – Usability Professionals. Hrsg. von Anja Endmann, Holger Fischer u. Malte Krökel. Berlin: De Gruyter Oldenbourg 2015. S. 415–419.10.1515/9783110443882-052Search in Google Scholar
© 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
