top of page
Michigan_State_University_Libraries_Main_Building.jpg

MSU Digital Library Signs

My Role

UX Researcher

Designer

Overview:

The MSU Library digital signage project aimed to enhance the effectiveness and user engagement of the library’s information displays. The library’s current digital signs were outdated and failed to capture user attention, often leaving users with incomplete or hard-to-find information. Our team’s objective was to evaluate the existing signs to determine their shortcomings and develop improvements. We focused on addressing issues such as poor visibility and user interaction, aiming to create a more intuitive and engaging information experience for library visitors.

Problem Identification

The problem we identified is that the MSU library signs are outdated, lacking user engagement, and are often unnoticed. Users struggle with the signs because they rely heavily on prior knowledge or hard-to-obtain information.

Hypothesis:

The current digital signage system at the MSU library does not effectively meet user needs, resulting in low engagement and poor usability.

  • How might we make the digital signs more noticeable and engaging to users?

  • How might we improve the usability of the signs for users who are unfamiliar with the library or the signs themselves?

  • How can we redesign the signs to provide clearer and more accessible information?

  • How might we ensure the signs are interactive and easily understood by all users?

Approach:

I developed a project plan to conduct research and analysis using user personas, user surveys, and comparative analysis. I then wanted to focus on ideation, wireframing, and prototyping, leveraging Figma for design and user testing to refine and validate the solutions.

Screenshot 2024-08-13 214336.png

Step One: Understanding User Needs

Research Goal:

Identify the characteristics and needs of library users and how they engage with the digital signs.

Overview:

To effectively address the issues with the library's digital signs, we began by defining user personas that represented the typical users of the screens. We then conducted a heuristic analysis targeting regular library visitors to gather insights into their interaction with the signs and their general library activities. This approach helped us gain a clearer understanding of user behavior and preferences, setting the foundation for improving the digital signage experience.

What we were looking for:

  • Understanding User Behavior: Insights into how users interact with the digital signs.

  • User Preferences: Information on what users prefer in terms of digital signage.

  • General Library Activities: Insights into users' typical activities within the library.

  • Interaction Patterns: How users engage with the current digital signs.

  • Areas for Improvement: Identifying issues or shortcomings in the current digital signage experience.

Screenshot 2024-04-02 195406.png

User persona example.

Heuristic Analysis:

  • Home Screen:

    • Unclickable hours link; “Select a button” text disappears; Location of events should link to a map; Basic design, with locations listed unclearly

  • Find a Book:

    • Screen times out; Confusing “Portals” and inconsistent map orientation; Unresponsive buttons and easy to press wrong button; Confusing maps and crowded text

  • Maps:

    • Orientation issue; Unclickable buttons; Crowded text

Screenshot 2024-04-02 195001.jpg

Digital sign at the Business college

Screenshot 2024-04-02 195607.png

Digital sign at the Scholarship Lab

Step Two: Comparative Analysis

Research Question:

How do digital signs across the Michigan State campus compare to the library’s digital signs, and what improvements can be made based on this comparison?

During this data collection phase, our team explored other digital signs around the Michigan State campus for a comparative analysis. Upon discovering additional digital signs, we conducted a thorough evaluation of these signs in relation to the library’s signs. After compiling a comparative analysis report, we met to discuss the findings and, together, developed a testing scenario for the current digital screens to identify potential improvements based on user feedback.

Screenshot 2024-04-02 195537.png

Digital sign at the Scholarship Lab

Findings:

  • Similarities:

    • Design Elements: Both Broad Business and Law Building signs use MSU colors and have consistent color schemes.

    • Navigation: Both signs place navigation elements at or near the bottom of the screen.

    • Floor Filtering: Both allow filtering by floor.

    • Time/Date Display: Both display current time and date.

    • Maps and Directories:

      • Law Library and Broad Business signs feature maps with building layouts, restrooms, and emergency exits.

      • Both signs display directories with contact information for professionals.

      • Campus maps are interactive on both signs.

  • Key Differences:

    • Broad Business Sign: Vertical layout; accessibility setting moves navigation.; Features room type filtering and has better touch sensitivity.; Limited to a map page.

    • Law Building Sign: Interactive elements are highlighted; has a "Clinics" page.; Includes placeholder text and less detailed maps.; Events page is non-interactive; detailed campus map with location features.

    • Digital Scholarship Lab: Mobile OS-like homepage with app icons.; Navigation is left-sided; static maps with user-friendly buttons.

Step Three: User Testing

Interview Recruitment:

My team and I spent a day at the library recruiting volunteers for user testing. We guided participants in using the screens to find a book and locate a specific room. Many users were unfamiliar with the interactive features of the signs. Based on our observations, we created a user testing report detailing our findings and identified areas for improvement. We then discussed these insights and used them to inform the design phase of the project.

Interview Questions:

  1. Ask about library experience

    1. What is your year in school?

    2. How often do you visit the library on a weekly basis

    3. Have you noticed or used the digital signs in the library?

  2. Ask user to complete each task

    1. Explain task as generally as possible

    2. Provide clarification as needed

    3. Remind participant to think aloud and explain their process

    4. Make notes (mental or physical) of things that cause participant to struggle to pick their brains later

    5. Form questions based on mental notes to get more
      information out of the participant

  3. Once all tasks have been completed, ask follow up questions

    1. How comfortable do you feel using the information provided by the digital sign?

  4. Thank user and give them lollipop from van

Screenshot 2024-04-02 201454.png

MSU Library

digital_sign_mock_up_2.png

Mockups for MSU Library​ Signs

digital_sign_mock_up_3.png

Mockups for MSU Library​ Signs

Findings:

  • Awareness: Interviewees (Kinsey Skjold, Arielle Melong, Bri Goldsmith) were largely unaware of the digital signage's interactive features; Kinsey and Arielle didn’t recognize the signs, while Bri had noticed them but hadn’t used them before testing.

  • Interactivity Confusion: Users did not realize the signs were interactive, often perceiving them as slideshow screens.

  • Navigation Issues: 

    • The home screen did not clearly differentiate itself from non-interactive signage.

    • Multiple options on screens, like "Find a Location," were not communicated well; arrows indicating more options were unclear.

    • Users struggled to orient themselves using cardinal directions; consistent map orientation and better transitions are needed.

  • Events Page: Easy to find but lacked additional details; users had difficulty determining which texts were interactive.

  • Touchscreen Problems: Issues with slow feedback and inconsistent pressure led to confusion about interactive elements.

  • Campus Map: Most helpful and easy to use, but the legend being part of the map image (rather than a separate object) caused navigation issues.

  • Overall Performance: Users completed tasks efficiently with minor issues.

Step Four: Designing

We collectively decided that we would all participate in the design phase so that we could get a diverse set of opinions on the overall design of the screens. One of the most prevalent things that was discovered during the user testing was the fact that not many users knew the signs were interactive.

 

To rectify this we decided to implement a screen saver type of screen that flashes touch to start. This helps users notice the signs more when they are just passing by them. Another thing that we decided to do was to change the branding of the sign, as the colors did not match the MSU branding and looked semi out of place within the library. We also created mock ups of the physical signs to allow for better accessibility for those in wheelchairs to easily access them.

Mockups for MSU Library​ Signs

What I learned:

Throughout this project, I have deepened my comprehension of user research, recognizing its significance in establishing a meaningful connection with users. This heightened understanding has translated into enhanced communication skills and a more adept execution of field studies and user testing. Specifically, I've become more open in my approach to the users, facilitating the extraction of valuable information for product improvement.

Moreover, this project has allowed me to reassess and expand my limits, fostering a more open expression of my thoughts.While I don't consider shyness a flaw, these experiences have provided a platform for self-reflection and personal growth. Concurrently, my proficiency in conducting heuristic analysis has progressed significantly, enabling a more detailed examination and identification of accessibility issues.

During this project, I improved in using Figma, particularly while creating the map for library signs. Despite the initial struggles, it motivated me to enhance my proficiency in this tool and complete the design work I was tasked with.

The comparative analysis proved to be an interesting exercise, allowing me to find effective elements from various digital screens into the redesign of the library's digital screens. Notably, the heuristic and competitive analyses were strengths for me, as they align with my ability to scrutinize details and identify areas for improvement.

The creation of diverse personas for potential library screen users was a particularly enjoyable aspect of this project. This exercise not only allowed for creativity but also contributed to a better understanding of user interactions with digital screens.

I've honed my skills in interview setup, maintaining a professional yet comfortable demeanor when engaging with users. Additionally, my experience in conducting field studies has improved, enabling the design of effective user testing methods for gathering important information and implementing real improvements. Working within a group on this project has also provided valuable insights into effective communication, ensuring everyone feels included and acknowledged.

bottom of page