A successful design study is a product of effective collaboration. The following elements were key to our success:

  1. Shared Language: By using the task taxonomies (Brehmer & Munzner, Amar et al.), both computer and domain experts had a shared language to describe needs and capabilities.
  2. Mutual Respect: The computer experts respected the domain expert’s knowledge, and the domain expert trusted the computer experts’ design choices.
  3. Active Documentation: Instead of just a final report, the logs created a living document of the collaborative process, capturing every “aha” moment and every challenge.
  4. Tangible Artifacts: The sketches, prototypes, and code implementations served as tangible conversation pieces. They moved the collaboration beyond abstract discussions and into a concrete, shared reality.

Collaboration Intensity by Phase

Phase Collaboration Intensity Key Collaborators Focus
Stage 1 High Domain expert + researcher Understanding problems and workflows
Stage 2 Medium Domain expert + designer Validating design concepts and iterations
Stage 3 Low Primarily developer Technical implementation with periodic check-ins
Stage 4 High Domain expert + researcher Usability testing and validation
Stage 5 Medium Full team Reflection and documentation

Collaboration Models That Worked

Co-Design Sessions

Frequency: Weekly during Stages 1 and 2, bi-weekly during Stage 3 Participants: Domain expert (Mark), researcher/designer, occasional technical advisor Format: In-person preferred, remote when necessary, structured with specific goals

Effective Practices:

  • Preparation: Always sent agenda and materials 24 hours in advance
    • Prepared specific questions based on previous session outcomes
    • Shared visual materials (sketches, prototypes) before sessions to allow review time
  • Facilitation: Used collaborative sketching and think-aloud protocols
    • Started each session with recap of previous decisions and rationale
    • Used “How might we…” questions to maintain solution focus
    • Encouraged criticism and alternative suggestions with “What if…” prompts
  • Documentation: Live note-taking with immediate read-back for validation
    • Photographed all sketches immediately after sessions
    • Sent summary within 24 hours with action items and next steps

Sample Session Structure:

  1. Opening (10 min): Review previous decisions and current context
  2. Context Setting (15 min): Domain expert shares recent relevant experiences
  3. Collaborative Activity (45 min): Sketch review, iteration, or problem-solving
  4. Synthesis (15 min): Summarize insights and validate understanding
  5. Next Steps (5 min): Define specific deliverables and timeline for next session

Regular Check-ins

Frequency: Twice weekly during active development phases Duration: 30 minutes maximum Participants: Domain expert and lead developer/designer

Meeting Effectiveness Factors:

  • Agenda Structure: Status update, specific questions, demo of progress, next priorities
  • Time Management: Strict 30-minute limit encouraged focus and preparation
  • Decision Making: Used “decision, discussion, or information” framework for each agenda item
  • Action Items: Always ended with specific, assignable tasks with deadlines

Expert Reviews

Timing: End of Stage 1, midpoint of Stage 2, before final implementation Participants: Domain expert plus 2-3 colleagues from transportation department Format: Structured presentation followed by guided discussion

Review Effectiveness:

  • Preparation: Created specific materials for each review (personas, task flows, interactive prototypes)
  • Question Framework: Focused on “Does this match your experience?” and “What would you change?”
  • Feedback Integration: Prioritized feedback based on frequency of mention and alignment with core tasks

Communication Strategies

Communication Channels

Primary Channels:

Channel Purpose Frequency Participants
Email Formal updates, sharing materials, scheduling Daily during active phases All stakeholders
Video calls Co-design sessions, demos, complex discussions 2-3x per week Core team
Shared Google Drive Version control, collaborative documents, sketches Continuous All team members
Slack Quick questions, informal updates, file sharing As needed Development team

Communication Protocols:

  • Response Times: 24 hours for email, 4 hours for Slack during business days
  • Escalation: Phone call for urgent issues, video call for complex problems
  • Documentation: All decisions and rationale documented in shared log, meeting notes always shared within 24 hours

Information Sharing

Documentation Strategy:

  • Central Repository: Google Drive shared folder with organized sections for each handbook stage
  • Version Control: Date-based file naming with clear “current” versions, archived older versions in dated folders
  • Access Permissions: Full team access to working documents, read-only sharing with stakeholders for major milestones

Knowledge Transfer:

  • Onboarding: Initial 2-hour session covering domain context, design process overview, and role expectations
  • Context Sharing: Weekly domain updates where expert shared recent experiences, challenges, or contextual changes
  • Technical Communication: Avoided jargon, used transportation analogies to explain design concepts, always checked understanding

Language and Terminology

Vocabulary Management:

  • Glossary Development: Maintained shared document mapping transportation terms to visualization concepts
  • Translation Needs: Created explicit bridges between “delays” (domain) and “outliers” (visualization), “routes” vs. “categories”
  • Clarity Checks: Regular “Let me paraphrase what I heard…” discussions to verify mutual understanding

Cultural Considerations:

  • Communication Styles: Domain expert preferred concrete examples, design team used abstract principles - incorporated both approaches
  • Time Zones: All collaborators in same geographic area - no distribution challenges
  • Hierarchy: Domain expert was senior in organization - maintained respect while ensuring design autonomy

Relationship Building

Trust Development

Trust Development

Trust-Building Activities:

  • Transparent Process: Shared all design rationale and decision-making criteria openly with domain expert
  • Admitting Limitations: Acknowledged when technical or design constraints required compromises, explained alternatives
  • Consistent Follow-through: Always delivered on commitments and explained when changes were needed
  • Expertise Recognition: Regularly acknowledged domain expert’s insights and gave credit for improvements

Trust Indicators:

  • Open Criticism: Domain expert became increasingly comfortable critiquing designs and suggesting alternatives
  • Proactive Sharing: Domain expert began volunteering relevant context and information without being asked
  • Autonomy Comfort: Domain expert expressed comfort with design team making decisions between meetings

Managing Expectations

Expectation Setting:

  • Project Scope: [How boundaries were established]
  • Deliverables: [How outputs were defined]
  • Timeline: [How schedules were communicated]
  • Roles: [How responsibilities were clarified]

Expectation Management:

  • Regular Updates: [How progress was communicated]
  • Scope Changes: [How changes were handled]
  • Setback Communication: [How problems were addressed]

Conflict Resolution

Common Sources of Conflict:

  1. Conflict Type 1: [e.g., Different priorities]
    • Resolution Strategy: [How it was addressed]
    • Prevention: [How to avoid in future]
  2. Conflict Type 2: [e.g., Technical disagreements]
    • Resolution Strategy: [How it was addressed]
    • Prevention: [How to avoid in future]

Resolution Framework:

  1. Early Detection: [How conflicts were identified early]
  2. Direct Communication: [How issues were addressed directly]
  3. Mediation: [When and how third parties were involved]
  4. Documentation: [How resolutions were recorded]

Knowledge Exchange Patterns

Domain to Design Knowledge Transfer

Effective Transfer Methods:

  • Method 1: [e.g., Job shadowing]
    • Effectiveness: [Rating and explanation]
    • Best Practices: [What made it work well]
  • Method 2: [e.g., Structured interviews]
    • Effectiveness: [Rating and explanation]
    • Best Practices: [What made it work well]

Knowledge Gaps:

  • Gap 1: [Area where understanding was incomplete]
    • Impact: [How this affected the project]
    • Resolution: [How the gap was addressed]

Design to Domain Knowledge Transfer

Teaching Design Concepts:

  • Visualization Principles: [How design principles were explained]
  • User Experience Concepts: [How UX ideas were communicated]
  • Iterative Process: [How the design process was explained]

Demonstrating Value:

  • Early Wins: [Quick demonstrations of design value]
  • Prototype Benefits: [How prototypes proved design concepts]
  • User Feedback: [How user insights demonstrated design value]

Stakeholder Engagement

Engagement Strategy

Stakeholder Mapping:

Stakeholder Interest Level Influence Level Engagement Strategy
Transit Planning Manager High High Weekly progress meetings and demo sessions
City Data Analyst Medium High Bi-weekly feedback sessions on data visualization
Bus Operations Supervisor High Medium Monthly interviews and usability testing
IT Systems Coordinator Low Medium Technical reviews and implementation planning

Engagement Activities:

  • Weekly Progress Demos
    • Frequency: Every Friday afternoon
    • Participants: Transit planning team and development team
    • Effectiveness: High - kept stakeholders informed and engaged
  • Bi-weekly Feedback Sessions
    • Frequency: Every other Tuesday
    • Participants: Domain experts and UX designers
    • Effectiveness: Very High - crucial for iterative design improvements
  • Monthly Usability Testing
    • Frequency: Last week of each month
    • Participants: End users (transit planners) and research team
    • Effectiveness: High - validated design decisions and identified issues

Maintaining Momentum

Momentum Drivers:

  • Regular Milestone Celebrations: Acknowledging progress at each stage completion
  • Visible Progress Artifacts: Interactive prototypes that stakeholders could use and test
  • Clear Communication Channels: Slack workspace and weekly email updates
  • Stakeholder Ownership: Giving domain experts ownership of specific design decisions

Momentum Challenges:

  • Challenge 1: [What threatened engagement]
    • Solution: [How it was addressed]
  • Challenge 2: [What threatened engagement]
    • Solution: [How it was addressed]

User Involvement

User Participation Strategy

Recruitment:

  • Approach: [How users were identified and recruited]
  • Incentives: [What motivated participation]
  • Challenges: [Recruitment difficulties encountered]

Participation Methods:

Method Stage Participants Effectiveness
[Interviews] [Stage 1] [Number/type] [Rating/notes]
[Co-design] [Stage 2] [Number/type] [Rating/notes]
[Testing] [Stage 4] [Number/type] [Rating/notes]

User Feedback Integration:

  • Collection: [How feedback was gathered]
  • Analysis: [How feedback was analyzed]
  • Implementation: [How feedback influenced design]
  • Follow-up: [How users were updated on changes]

User Champion Development

Champion Identification:

  • Characteristics: [What made effective user champions]
  • Selection: [How champions were identified]

Champion Roles:

  • Role 1: [e.g., Feedback provider]
  • Role 2: [e.g., Advocate to other users]
  • Role 3: [e.g., Testing coordinator]

Collaboration Tools and Infrastructure

Tool Effectiveness

Communication Tools:

Tool Purpose Effectiveness (1-5) Notes
[Tool 1] [What it was used for] [Rating] [What worked/didn’t work]
[Tool 2] [What it was used for] [Rating] [What worked/didn’t work]

Collaboration Platforms:

Platform Purpose Effectiveness (1-5) Notes
[Platform 1] [What it was used for] [Rating] [What worked/didn’t work]
[Platform 2] [What it was used for] [Rating] [What worked/didn’t work]

Documentation Systems:

  • System Used: [Primary documentation platform]
  • Effectiveness: [How well it supported collaboration]
  • Limitations: [What didn’t work well]

Infrastructure Lessons:

What Worked Well:

  • Infrastructure element 1: [Why it was effective]
  • Infrastructure element 2: [Why it was effective]

What Could Be Improved:

  • Infrastructure gap 1: [How it could be better]
  • Infrastructure gap 2: [How it could be better]

Collaboration Challenges and Solutions

Major Collaboration Challenges

Challenge 1: [e.g., Time zone differences]

  • Impact: [How it affected the project]
  • Solution Attempted: [What was tried]
  • Effectiveness: [How well the solution worked]
  • Lessons: [What was learned]

Challenge 2: [e.g., Different professional languages]

  • Impact: [How it affected the project]
  • Solution Attempted: [What was tried]
  • Effectiveness: [How well the solution worked]
  • Lessons: [What was learned]

Challenge 3: [e.g., Competing priorities]

  • Impact: [How it affected the project]
  • Solution Attempted: [What was tried]
  • Effectiveness: [How well the solution worked]
  • Lessons: [What was learned]

Collaboration Success Factors

Critical Success Factors:

  1. Factor 1: [e.g., Clear communication protocols]
    • Implementation: [How this was established]
    • Impact: [Why this was crucial]
  2. Factor 2: [e.g., Regular check-ins]
    • Implementation: [How this was established]
    • Impact: [Why this was crucial]
  3. Factor 3: [e.g., Shared goals]
    • Implementation: [How this was established]
    • Impact: [Why this was crucial]

Recommendations for Future Collaborations

Setup Recommendations

Team Composition:

  • Essential Roles: [Roles that must be represented]
  • Helpful Additions: [Roles that add value]
  • Skills Mix: [Balance of technical and domain expertise]

Initial Relationship Building:

  • Kickoff Activities: [How to start collaboration well]
  • Expectation Setting: [Critical expectations to establish]
  • Communication Setup: [Essential communication infrastructure]

Process Recommendations

Communication Rhythm:

  • Regular Meetings: [Recommended meeting cadence]
  • Checkpoint Reviews: [Key review points in process]
  • Ad-hoc Communication: [When and how to communicate between meetings]

Decision Making:

  • Decision Framework: [How to structure decisions]
  • Authority Levels: [Who can make what decisions]
  • Escalation Paths: [When and how to escalate]

Relationship Maintenance

Ongoing Practices:

  • Practice 1: [Regular activity to maintain collaboration]
  • Practice 2: [Regular activity to maintain collaboration]

Warning Signs:

  • Sign 1: [Indicator that collaboration is struggling]
    • Response: [How to address this sign]
  • Sign 2: [Indicator that collaboration is struggling]
    • Response: [How to address this sign]

Collaboration Impact Assessment

Quantitative Measures:

  • Meeting Frequency: [Actual vs. planned]
  • Communication Volume: [Messages, emails, etc.]
  • Decision Speed: [Time from issue to resolution]
  • Participation Rates: [Attendance at collaborative activities]

Qualitative Measures:

  • Relationship Quality: [Assessment of working relationships]
  • Knowledge Transfer: [Effectiveness of learning exchange]
  • Satisfaction: [Collaborator satisfaction with process]
  • Innovation: [Creative outcomes from collaboration]

Long-term Relationship Outcomes:

  • Ongoing Partnerships: [Relationships that continue beyond project]
  • Future Collaboration: [Likelihood of future work together]
  • Network Expansion: [New professional connections made]

Final Collaboration Reflections

Most Valuable Collaboration Moments:

  1. Moment 1: [Specific collaborative breakthrough]
    • Why Important: [What made this moment valuable]
  2. Moment 2: [Specific collaborative breakthrough]
    • Why Important: [What made this moment valuable]

Collaboration Skills Developed:

  • Skill 1: [New collaboration capability gained]
  • Skill 2: [New collaboration capability gained]

Advice for Future Collaborators:

  • For Design Teams: [Advice for designers working with domain experts]
  • For Domain Experts: [Advice for domain experts working with designers]
  • For Project Managers: [Advice for those managing collaborative design studies]

Appendices

A. Collaboration Agreement Template

[Template for establishing collaboration ground rules]

B. Communication Plan Template

[Template for planning communication strategy]

C. Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet

[Tool for mapping and planning stakeholder engagement]

D. Conflict Resolution Checklist

[Step-by-step guide for addressing collaboration conflicts]