Mentorology
empowers meaningful & rewarding mentorship
Context
Mentor relationships are very helpful to our professional and personal development. When finding a mentor, we want to be specific in order to avoid a mismatched mentorship. The Mentorology mobile app helps you find a mentor or mentee that meet your expectations.
Timeline: 7 days constraint
My roles: UX/UI Designer, UX Researcher
The process
1. Understanding the potential users
I interviewed 2 UW students and 1 UW alumni regarding their experience and expectations of various mentorship programs. I asked follow up questions to understand their needs and pain points based on their responses. User personas were created to represent their background, thoughts, and frustrations.
2. Synthesizing Findings
Potential mentors are
Uncertain about the time needed for a mentorship.
Busy with other commitments, such as finding a job.
Potential mentees are
Struggling to find conversation topics in a mentorship.
Expecting a well planned mentor program.
Worried about not being able to give something in return.
3. Design Question
After understanding the needs from both mentor and mentee, there were 3 pain points in a mentorship that needed to be resolved.
•Low efficiency
•Lack of mutual assistance
•Anxiety & worry
The design question addresses the 3 pain points
4. Brainstorming
To answer the design question and find possible solutions, I used sticky notes to draw and write down my ideas, and sorted them into 3 categories:
Ideas to empower efficiency
Ideas to lower anxiety
Ideas to encourage mutual assistance
5. Design Principles & Main Features
6. Paper Prototyping
I began the prototyping by sketching out possible layouts. Paper and pen helps me focus the ideas I has in mind. I enjoy working without a computer for a while because stepping away from computer made design more personal. During the process, I organized the elements needed for each screen, included the title, content, the place of buttons, etc.
7. Information Architecture
After paper prototyping, I had a clearer idea of what features and functions go under each tab in the App.
8. Mid-Fidelity Prototyping
The problem I set out to solve had become clearer at this stage, I prioritized 3 main flows that a first time user would walk through in having a first mentorship. I tried to finalize the title and description of each screen at this stage in order to lower the design thinking load before high-fidelity prototyping.
9. High-Fidelity Prototyping
Flow A
• Main features introduction
• Sign in
Research Insights
Mentorship programs are generally different from mentee’s expectation.
Mentees find it difficult to connect with their mentors.
Design Decisions
Introduce main features before signing in which help users to understand what to expect in the app.
Encourage users to share their values, topics they are interested in, and meet in person to build stronger connections.
Flow B
• Create a profile
• Match a mentor or mentee
• Start a conversation
Research Insights
There may be lack of common interests in a mentorship.
Potential mentors are occupied with seeking employment after graduation, and may hesitate to become mentors.
Design Decisions
Add “emojis about me” in the profile to help users find some topics in building rapport.
Encourage mentees to write a LinkedIn recommendation for their mentor.
Flow C
• Create an agenda
• Upload the first meeting picture
• Receive a $15 Starbucks gift card
Research Insights
Mentor programs may be unstructured.
There is pressure in a mentorship.
Mentees hope to befriend their mentors.
Design Decisions
The “Agenda” feature empowers users in scheduling meetings, creating mentoring plans and to-do lists, writing questions and notes.
Provide a $15 Starbucks gift card after users upload a coffee/beverage in-person meeting picture.
10. User Feedback
I conducted usability testing with 2 UW students using a high-fidelity prototype.
What went well?
• Users thought the main features introduction in flow A was clear.
• Directly logging in with UW NetID was convenient.
• Knowing the percentage of matching interests was useful in finding an ideal mentor or mentee.
• The visual design was very engaging.
• “Emojis about me” and the “quotes” features made users want to chat.
What could be better?
Flow C was a bit confusing for users, here are the findings and my design changes.
Iterated Flow C:
Simplified the screens, one thing at a time, made it intuitive without tutorials.
11. Final Product
Flow A
• Features intro
• Sign in
Flow B
• Create a profile
• Match
• Start a conversation
Flow C
• Create an agenda
• Upload a picture
• Receive a gift card
12. Takeaways
Follow-up questions during the interview are important to understanding users' motivation and frustration with their experience. Not everyone is expressive, one good question or two would encourage them to say more and clarify the pain points. Knowing what’s important to the users from the start would save time.
In the future, I would spend more time on mid-fidelity wireframes to conduct usability tests. Although it only takes one hour to make changes to high-fidelity wireframes, it would save more time in future projects. Since designers may lack a user’s perspective, I’ve learned to test the main ideas and flows as early as possible.
Given more time, I would like to conduct more usability tests and reiterate my design. I would also want to know if users are interested in manually prioritizing their searching criteria, and what kind of interaction would be more efficient in completing the tasks.