http://www.yellowpages.com.au/search/postLocationSearch.do?bookId=15&suburbPostcode=2600+2601&businessType=consumer+database+vendor&locationClue=Canberra&locationText=Canberra+CBD+ACT&stateId=6

http://www.fao.org/docrep/W3241E/w3241e03.htm

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/CD/CD01100.pdf

Using The Case Method

The case method brings reality into the classroom. When developed and presented effectively, with rich and interesting detail, cases keep conceptual discussions grounded in reality.

The case method can help you develop your analytical and judgment skills. Case analysis also helps you learn how to ask the right questions. Students aspiring to be managers and business owners can improve their ability to identify underlying problems, rather than focusing on superficial symptoms, through development of the skills required to ask probing, yet appropriate, questions. The particular set of cases your instructor chooses to assign the class can expose you to a wide variety of organizations and managerial situations. This approach vicariously broadens your experience base and provides insights into many types of situations, tasks, and responsibilities. Finally, experience in analyzing cases definitely enhances your problem-solving skills.

Furthermore, when your instructor requires oral and written presentations, your communication skills will be honed through use of the case method. Of course, these added skills depend on your preparation as well as your instructor’s facilitation of learning. However, the primary responsibility for learning is yours. The quality of case discussion is generally acknowledged to require, at a minimum, a thorough mastery of case facts and some independent analysis of them. The case method therefore first requires that you read and think carefully about each case. Additional comments about the preparation you should complete to successfully discuss a case appear in the next section.

Back

Student Preparation For Case Discussion

If you are inexperienced with the case method, you may need to alter your study habits. A lecture-oriented course may not require you to do intensive preparation for each class period. In such a course, you have the latitude to work through assigned readings and review lecture notes according to your own schedule. However, an assigned case requires significant and conscientious preparation before class. Without it, you will be unable to contribute meaningfully to in-class discussion. Therefore, careful reading and thinking about case facts, as well as reasoned analyses and the development of alternative solutions to case problems, are essential. Recommended alternatives should flow logically from core problems identified through study of the case. Table 1 shows a set of steps that can help you develop familiarity with a case, identify problems, and propose strategic actions that increase the probability that a business will achieve strategic competitiveness and earn above-average returns.

Back

Table 1 An Effective Case Analysis Process
Step 1: a. In general–determine who, what, how, where and when (the critical facts in a case).
Gaining Familiarity b. In detail–identify the places, persons, activities, and contexts of the situation.
c. Recognize the degree of certainty/uncertainty of acquired information.

Step 2: a. List all indicators (including stated “problems”) that something is not as expected or as desired
Recognizing Symptoms b. Ensure that symptoms are not assumed to be the problem (symptoms should lead to identification of the problem).

Step 3 a. Identify critical statements by major parties (e.g., people, groups, the work unit, etc.).
Identifying goals b. List all goals of the major parties that exist or can be reasonably inferred.

Step 4 a. Decide which ideas, models, and theories seem useful.
Conducting the Analysis b. Apply these conceptual tools to the situation.
c. As new information is revealed, cycle back to substeps a and b.

Step 5 a. Identify predicaments (goal inconsistencies).
Making the Diagnosis b. Identify problems (descrepancies between goals and performance).
c. Prioritize predicaments/problems regarding timing, importance, etc.

Step 6 a. Specify and prioritize the criteria used to choose action alternatives.
Doing the Action Planning b. Discover or invent feasible action alternatives.
c. Examine the probable consequences of action alternatives.
d. Select a course of action.
e. Design an implementation plan/schedule.
f. Create a plan for assessing the action to be implemented.
Source: C.C. Lundberg and C. Enz, 1993, A framework for student case preperation, Case Research Journal 13 (summer): 144.

Gaining Familiarity

The first step of an effective case analysis process calls for you to become familiar with the facts featured in the case. Initially, you should become familiar with the focal business’s general situation (e.g., who, what, how, where, and when). Thorough familiarization demands appreciation of the nuances as well as the major issues in the case.

Gaining familiarity with a situation requires you to study several situational levels, including interactions between and among individuals within groups. Recognizing relationships facilitates a more thorough understanding of the specific case situation. It is also important that you evaluate information on a continuum of certainty. Information that is verifiable by several sources and judged along similar dimensions can be classified as a fact. Information representing someone’s perceptual judgment of a particular situation is referred to as an inference. Information gleaned from a situation that is not verifiable is classified as speculation. Finally, information that is independent of verifiable sources and arises through individual or group discussion is an assumption. Obviously, case analysts and decision makers prefer having access to facts over inferences, speculations, and assumptions.

Personal feelings, judgments, and opinions evolve when you are analyzing a case. It is important to be aware of your own feelings about the case and to evaluate the accuracy of perceived “facts” to ensure that the objectivity of your work is maximized.

Back

Recognizing Symptoms

Recognition of symptoms is the second step of an effective case analysis process. A symptom is an indication that something is not as you or someone else thinks it should be. You may be tempted to correct the symptoms instead of searching for true problems. True problems are the conditions or situations requiring solution before a business’s performance can improve. Identifying and listing symptoms early in the case analysis process tends to reduce the temptation to label symptoms as problems. The focus of your analysis should be on the actual causes of a problem, rather than on its symptoms. It is important therefore to remember that symptoms are indicators of problems; subsequent work facilitates discovery of critical causes of problems that your case recommendations must address.

Back

Identifying Goals

The third step of effective case analysis calls for you to identify the goals of the business and/or individuals in a case. Completing this step successfully sometimes can be difficult. Nonetheless, the outcomes you attain from this step are essential to an effective case analysis because identifying goals, intent, and mission helps you to clarify the major problems featured in a case and to evaluate alternative solutions to those problems.

Back

Conducting the Analysis

The fourth step of effective case analysis is concerned with acquiring a systematic understanding of a situation. Occasionally cases are analyzed in a less-than-thorough manner. Such analyses may be a product of a busy schedule or the difficulty and complexity of the issues described in a particular case. Sometimes you will face pressures on your limited amounts of time and may believe that you can understand the situation described in a case with-out systematic analysis of all the facts. However, experience shows that familiarity with a case’s facts is a necessary, but insufficient, step to the development of effective solutions. In fact, a less-than-thorough analysis typically results in an emphasis on symptoms, rather than problems and their causes. To analyze a case effectively, you should be skeptical of quick or easy approaches and answers.

Back

Making the Diagnosis

The fifth step of effective case analysis-diagnosis-is the process of identifying and clarifying the roots of the problems by comparing goals to facts. In this step, it is useful to search for predicaments. Predicaments are situations in which goals do not fit with known facts. When you evaluate the actual performance of an organization or individual, you may identify over- or under achievement (relative to established goals). Of course, single-problem situations are rare.

Effective diagnosis requires you to determine the problems affecting longer-term performance and those requiring immediate handling. Understanding these issues will aid your efforts to prioritize problems and predicaments, given available resources and existing constraints.

Back

Doing the Action Planning

The final step of an effective case analysis process is called action planning. Action planning is the process of identifying appropriate alternative actions. Important in the action planning step is selection of the criteria you will use to evaluate the identified alternatives.

Typically, managers “satisfice” when selecting courses of actions; that is, they find acceptable courses of action that meet most of the chosen evaluation criteria. A rule of thumb that has proved valuable to decision makers is to select an alternative that leaves other plausible alternatives available if the one selected fails.

Once you have selected the best alternative, you must specify an implementation plan. Developing an implementation plan serves as a reality check on the feasibility of your alternatives. Thus, it is important that you give thoughtful consideration to all issues associated with the implementation of the selected alternatives.

Back

Copyright © 2000-2003 South-Western College Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
webmaster
http://www.knowlessmallbusiness4e.nelson.com/

http://www.qas.com/au/products/verify-and-search-addresses.asp?ref=neo

Each one of these iterations of the concept takes a specific FUNCTIONALITY and explores it. It is an iterative methodology – a waterfall would examine stages in prototype development.

EVALUATING PARTICIPANT INTERACTIVES

this development of the keyboard mechanics offers a simple challenge function [remember and follow the sequence]

the [user] interactive has become a TOY or [passive] participant interactive

why passive – no meaningful action or agency but basic engagement via challenge

EVALUATION

* usability – through SUS usability questionnaire
* fun factor – through personal interview
* refer to the methods – subjective evaluation asks the user how they FEEL.

USER = The task that is set for the user to look and achieve is to be educated on the dance steps through visal aids.

EVALUATING AND DOCUMENTING FUN FACTORS:
*ask if they would play again?
*observe through video, record the beta-testers.

TEST, ANALYZE, REFINE AND REPEAT

EVALUATION
good gameplay has become the ulitimate goal pursued by anyone who wishes to remain in the business of game design [HCI & Game Design By Zhan Ye]

the ye brothers argue that there are two distinct aspects to the concept of good gameplay

[REFERENCE]
Ye, Z. 2005. HCI and Game Design: From a Practicioner’s Point of View. ZhanYe & DingYe. (accessed 6 May, 2006)
http://www.ye-brothers.com/documents/HCIGAMEDESIGN.pdf

* playability – this involves all the classic USABILITY checks and guidelines
* FUN [challenge, entertainment] – this is the subjective data collected from PLAYTESTING

MUST DO’S
*prototype and test your survey – in the evaluation methodology
*does the evaluation method answer the questions you are asking? (refer back to the “Feedback Methodology” in the KIB210A3_Prototype.doc)

INTRODUCTION
The Dancing Shoes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ambient = 周遭的;環繞的
pervasive = 普遍的

The Dancing Shoes is a dancing game designed to promote novel forms of playing and learning for teen adults, using a diversity of ambient and pervasive technologies. These kinds of interactive spaces to encourage aspects of playful learning.

The Dancing Shoes game involved groups of teen adults having to use the keyboard arrows as a means of movement to follow the instructions shown on the screen in a computer based context.

Dancing Shoes is an interactive device that engages user in musical environment. The purpose of the product is to educate and correct user’s dance steps by controlling user’s movements. The product is used for educational purposes, such as dance schools, interested participants, etc. The main focus of the product is to train user’s dance technique with continuous control.

The purpose of using flash is to demonstrate how the music and dance movements are synchronized. It provides a game interface, similar to Konami’s Dance Dance Revolution game, to interact and learn. The user will be able to interact with the flash game in a fun and entertaining environment. They will learn the dance steps through visual and audio aids in the flash game. There are four different types of dance styles to choose from in the low-fidelity prototype.

a) This screen is the main menu for the Dancing Shoes flash game. The user will begin by clicking on the Game Instruction link to the Game Instruction screen.
b) The user will be able to obtain game instructions and rules from this screen. Then the user can navigate back to the main menu from the BACK button.
c) After redirecting back to the first screen, the user then chooses a pair of shoes for that specific dance style.
d) Use the arrow keys on the keyboard to move your foot towards the direction as displayed on the screen as soon as it touches your dance partner. If you fail to do move the step on the right timing, you will lose 1 of 3 chances. Once you have lost all 3 chances, the game is over. Your aim is to match your steps with your dance partner by retaining the appropriate step movements. The step animation on the right-hand side will synchronize with the arrows; therefore you could observe the dance movements while learning the order of the steps in a fun and entertaining sound toy environment.
e) The user will be able to return to the Main Menu through the Return link down the bottom.

TRIALS AND ANALYSIS
engrossed = 全神貫注的,專心致志的

Our project team ran a number of trials with our client and beta-testers aging from 18-30 years, demonstrating that the young adults were able to become engrossed in playful learning.

Taxonomy = 分類法;分類學

Assignment 3
decision one: audience definition – users
decision two: 3 mechanics to test
1. Set timing acuracy as to when users should eliminate the keys
2. Moving Dance Partner back and forth like real-life situation
3. Step animation being portrayed in real-life scenario.
mechanics that hold the interactive up

start with the documentation: Survey questionnaires, using SUS survey theory by John Brooke.

*audience statistics – requires 5 non-dance users (aged 18~30) that are computer literate, 5 non-dance students (aged 18~30) that are not computer literate, 5 dance students (aged 18~30)computer literate, 5 dance students (aged 18~30) not computer literate
As identified in assignment 2, Needs Analysis.

INTERVIEWS
From :
Creative Research Systems. 2003. Survey Design, Questionnaire Design Tips. (accessed 4 May, 2006).
http://www.surveysystem.com/sdesign.htm

Personal Interviews
An interview is called personal when the Interviewer asks the questions face-to-face with the Interviewee. Personal interviews can take place in the home in front of the computer.

Advantages
* The ability to let the Interviewee see, feel and/or taste a product.
* The ability to find the target population. For example, you can find people who have seen a film much more easily outside a theater in which it is playing than by calling phone numbers at random.
* Longer interviews are sometimes tolerated. Particularly with in-home interviews that have been arranged in advance. People may be willing to talk longer face-to-face than to someone on the phone.

Disadvantages

* Personal interviews usually cost more per interview than other methods. This is particularly true of in-home interviews, where travel time is a major factor.
* Each mall has its own characteristics. It draws its clientele from a specific geographic area surrounding it, and its shop profile also influences the type of client. These characteristics may differ from the target population and create a non-representative sample.

Therefore there is a limited number of people that were asked to be interviewed in such a short time frame.

J. Nielsen
J. Nielsen distinguishes two levels of prototyping according to the level of interaction provided by the prototype [Nielsen 93]:

* The horizontal prototype is actually only the man-machine interface (MMI). It could even be a sketch on paper.
* The vertical prototype implements some of the functionalities of the application allowing to more interaction

Usability First
From:
Usability First.2005. Usibility glossary: horizontal and vertical prototypes. (accessed 6 May, 2006)
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/glossary/term_363.txl

Horizontal prototypes are appropriate for understanding relationships across a broad system and for showing the range of abilities of a system.

Vertical prototypes are most appropriate when a certain complex feature of a system is poorly-understood and needs to be explored, e.g. as a proof-of-concept

Methods of Evaluation
From:
Usability First. 2005. Methods. (accessed 6 May, 2006).
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/methods/index.txl

There are a variety of approaches to usability evaluation that you may choose to take.

The methodologies can be divided into two broad categories:
* those that gather data from actual users and
* those that can be applied without actual users present.

Your choice of method depends on:

* Cost of evaluation
* Appropriateness to project
* Time constraints
* Cost of implementation
* Cost of training new users

Getting Started
User Centred Design is an approach that supports the entire development process with user-centred activities, in order to create applications which are easy to use and are of added value to the intended users.

At the planning and development of the project during assignment 2, real users were invited to test the prototype early in the project and frequently thereafter.

The objectives, requirements, and constraints of the development project, context of use and user testing scenario and the how and when; usibility requirements and guidelines and resources were collected at the initial client (stakeholder) meeting as outlined in assignment 2.

The standards for the way your interface is going to look and feel, so that it presents a consistent picture to the user and doesn’t commit some of the more elementary mistakes. Take a look at existing guidelines.

Raise awareness about usability in the rest of the development team by engaging them in usability topics. Bring your manager into the discussions.

Start by using disposable prototypes to try out some ideas with people from your user group. Paper prototyping is an excellent way to involve end users in the early stages of design. As your ideas firm up with the help of your user groups, you’ll be starting to create more advanced prototypes which may contain portions of code that you can use for the final release.

stakeholder meeting
A stakeholder meeting is a strategic way to derive usability objectives from business objectives, and to gain commitment to usability. It also collects information about the purpose of the system and its overall context of use.

Analyse context of use

Collect and agree detailed information about:

* Who are the intended offsiteuser and what are their offsitetask? (Why will they use the system? What is their experience and expertise?)
* What are the offsitetechnical and offsiteenvironmental constraints? (What types of hardware will be used in what organisational, technical and physical environments?)

This information is an essential input to requirements and the planning of other usability methods. It may be collected at an early stage during planning and feasibility, or in more detail as part of the usability requirements.

* Ensure that all factors that relate to use of the system are identified before design work starts.
* Provide a basis for designing later usability tests

evaluating existing systems
Evaluation of an earlier version or competitor system to identify usability problems and to obtain baseline measures of usability.

* Identifies problems to be avoided in the design of the new system.
* Provides measures of effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction which can be used as a baseline for the new system.

scenarios of use
Scenarios specify how users carry out their tasks in a specified context. They provide examples of usage as an input to design, and provide a basis for subsequent usability testing. They are user- and task-oriented use cases.
Benefits

* It encourages designers to consider the characteristics of the intended users, their tasks and their environment.
* Usability issues can be explored at a very early stage in the design process (before a commitment to code has been made).
* Scenarios can help identify usability targets and likely task completion times.
* The method promotes developer buy-in and encourages a user-centred design approach.
* Scenarios can also be used to generate contexts for evaluation studies.
* Only minimal resources are required to generate scenarios.
* The technique can be used by developers with little or no human factors expertise.
Method

An experienced moderator is recommended for the sessions in which the scenario is explored.

* Gather together the development team and other relevant stakeholders under the direction of an experienced facilitator.
* Identify intended users, their tasks and the general context. This information will provide the basis for the scenarios to be created by the development team.
* Functionally decompose user goals into the operations needed to achieve them.
* Consider which activities should be performed by the user and which by the computer.
* Create an outline of the users’ activities, goals and motivations for using the system being designed, and the tasks they will perform.
* To maintain design flexibility, scenarios should not specify what product features are used.
* Assign task time estimates and completion criteria as usability targets.
* The session can be videotaped for later review or transcribed for wider distribution.
* The results from scenario building sessions can be used to plan user-based evaluations.

requirements meeting

A workshop attended by users and developers who identify usability requirements that can be tested later in the development process.
* Highlights the importance of usability early in development
* Provides concrete objectives for usability
* Provides usability criteria that can be tested.

style guides
Style guides are used to provide a consistent look and feel. They should be defined as part of usability requirements and conformance should be monitored during development.
Benefits

* Style guides embody good practice in interface design.
* Following a style guide will increase the consistency between screens.
* Using a style guide can reduce the development time.
* Following general usability guidelines will improve the quality of the interface.

dianostic evaluation,
User based evaluation of a working system, where the primary objective is to identify usability problems.
Benefits

* Major usability problems are identified.
* An understanding is gained of why the user has difficulties with the system.
* Approximate measures can be obtained for the users’ effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction.

subjective assessment
Summary
Subjective assessment tells the evaluator how the users feel about the software being tested. This is distinct from how efficiently or effectively they perform with the software. The usual method of assessment is to used a standardised opinion questionnaire to avoid criticisms of subjectivity.
Benefits

* In a discretionary use scenario, user satisfaction is most probably the largest single key factor which will influence the users’ decision whether or not to continue with the software (other key factors may include price, technology, and brand loyalty).
* In a mandatory use scenario, poor satisfaction leads to absenteeism, fast staff turnover, and unrelated complaints from the workforce.
* Subjective Assessment complements data from efficiency and effectiveness measures.

* Subjective assessment usually produces a list of satisfying and unsatisfying software features which is especially useful if testing is taking place during development.

Method

This method gives the evaluator information about how the users feel about using the software being evaluated. This should be distinguished from:

* how well they perform with the software (effectiveness)

* how efficiently they work with the software (efficiency)

It is customary to use a close-ended questionnaire if one is available, in order to produce quantitative data, otherwise the results of the activity can be vague and open to interpretation. At worst, a critical incidents type technique may be used.

Usibility Inspection:

A usability inspection is a review of a system based on a set of guidelines. The review is conducted by a group of experts who are deeply familiar with the concepts of usability in design. The experts focus on a list of areas in design that have been shown to be troublesome for users.

Usability guidelines are usually derived from studies in human-computer interaction, ergonomics, graphic design, information design, and cognitive psychology. Some areas that get evaluated are the language used in the system, the amount of recall required of the user at each step in a process, and how the system provides feedback to the user. In particular, issues such as clarity, consistency, navigation, and error minimization are analyzed. Once the problems are discovered, the experts make recommendations for resolving these issues.

User Testing

User testing is the mainstay method when it comes to finding usability problems. Nothing is more convincing than watching person after person encounter difficulties with the same part of a software or information system. The difficult areas that repeat themselves between multiple test participants reveal areas that should be studied and changed by the developers. User testing can often uncover very specific areas needing improvement, where focus groups and task analysis often find more general areas needing improvement.

A trained observer conducts user testing often with the assistance of software developers. People who are representative of the target audience are asked to perform representative tasks with the software. The observer writes a user testing report listing the problems and offering recommendations based on their findings.

From Ilterative Design Process

Needs and Pleasures
Research design methodology – the iterative design process.

Iteration design is a design methodology based on a cyclic process of prototyping, testing, analyzing and refining a work in progress. In iterative design, interaction with the designed system is used as a form of research for informing and evolving a project, as successive versions, or iterations of a design are implemented.

Test; analyze; refine. And repeat. Because the experience of a viewer/user/player/etc cannot ever be completely predicted, in an iterative process design decisions are based on the experience of the prototype in progress. The prototype is tested, revisions are made, and the project is tested once more. In this way, the project develops through an ongoing dialogue between the designers, the design, and the testing audience.

In the case of this assignment, iterative design means playtesting. Throughout the entire process of design and development, the game is played. The development team plays it. Clients play it. A organize groups of testers that match your target audience was invited to test it. We have acquired as many people as possible play the game. In each case, we observe them, ask them questions, then adjust the design and playtest again.

A more iterative design process will streamline development resources and result in a more robust and successful final product.

Assignment THREE documentation
During assignment 2, we initially worked with the clients to identify the project's values: the abstract principles that the prototype would embody. The list of values we created included designing for a borad audience of non-dancers; a low techicality barrier; a prototype that was easy to learn and play buy deep and complex; gameplay that was intrinsically social and something that was in line with the educational context.

These play values were the parameters for a series of brainstorming sessions, interspersed with group play of dancer and non-dancing students. Eventually, a concept emerged: young-adults being controlled by the shoe. While every product embodies some kind of dance steps, we were drawn towards modeling a dance step that we hadn't seen depicted previously in a game. Technology and production limitations meant that the game would be digitally based, although it could involve a basic movement for the physical prototype.

Once these basic formal and conceptual questions had begun to be mapped out, the shape of the initial prototype became clear. The very first versio of Dancing shoes was played with a pair of shoes and a model posing various dance moves on tiled floors. As with the digital prototype, a hand-full of basic actions the player could make was implemented in the flash game.

Designing a first prototype requires strategic thinking about how to most quickly implement a playable version that can begin to address the project's chief uncertanties in a meaningful way.

A short version of the game was developed in assignment 2. Therefore the final form will last much longer for each stage. The high fidelity prototype was about implementing interactivity, visual and audio aesthetics, and other aspects of the game.

While we tested gameplay via the short flash iteration, programming for the final version began in Flash, and the core game logic we had developed for the Dancing Shoes prototype was recycled into the Flash Actionscript with little alteration. Parallel to the game design, the graphic language of the game and chart were presented in screen layouts. These early drafts of the visuals (initially developed through Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop) were dropped into the Flash version of the game.

As soon as the Flash version was playable, the development team played it. And as our game grew more refined, the clients tested it. After the initial screening, our clients have invited a group of testers to play the game. All of this testing and feedback helped us refine the game logic, visual aesthetics, and interface. The biggest challenge turned out to be clearly articulating the relationship between player action and game outcome: because the results of every turn are interdependent on each player’s actions, early versions of the game felt frustratingly arbitrary. Only through many design revisions and dialogue with our testers did we manage to structure the results of each turn to unambiguously communicate what had happened that round and why.

When the high fidelity was completed, we launched the game to an invite-only beta-tester community that slowly grew in the weeks leading up to public release. Certain time slots were scheduled as official testing events. We made it very easy for the beta testers to contact us and email in bug reports.

In the case of Dancing Shoes, the testing and prototyping cycle of iterative design was successful because at each stage, we clarified exactly what we wanted to test and how. We used written questionnaires. We debriefed after each testing session. And we strategized about how each version of the game would incorporate the visual, audio, game design, and technical elements of the previous versions, while also laying a foundation for the final form of the experience.

Reference
Zimmerman, E. 2006. Ilterative Design.
(accessed 4 May, 2006).
http://www.gmlb.com/articles/iterativedesign.html