USER EXPERIENCE – PRODUCT DESIGN LAB
A Product Design Lab is actually one of the richest environments for teaching user research because it
combines people, products, tools, spaces, workflows, safety, collaboration, and learning. The challenge is
helping students understand that they are not studying the lab—they are studying the user experience of
working in the lab.
For a 7-day module, I'd recommend framing the project as:
"Understanding the User Experience of the Product Design Lab."
This is broad enough to allow different groups to investigate different aspects without duplicating work.
Possible Research Scopes
Group 1: Tool Access and Usage
Research Question:
How do students locate, access, use, and return tools?
Topics:
Finding tools
Waiting for tools
Shared resources
Missing tools
Tool organization
Possible opportunity areas:
Storage systems
Labelling
Checkout systems
Portable tool kits
Group 2: Workspace Organization
Research:
Individual workspaces
Shared tables
Storage during projects
Material organization
Personal belongings
Methods:
Observation
Behavioral mapping
Photo documentation
Group 3: Prototype Making Workflow
Research:
Sequence of activities
Material selection
Cutting
Assembly
Testing
Cleanup
This is an excellent workflow study.
Group 4: Safety and Comfort
Research:
PPE usage
Dust management
Lighting
Ventilation
Noise
Fatigue
This introduces ergonomics alongside user research.
Group 5: Collaboration
Research:
Team interactions
Communication
Sharing equipment
Conflict points
Space usage
Group 6: Learning Experience
Research:
Following demonstrations
Asking for help
Understanding machine instructions
Confidence levels
Independent learning
Research Methods That Apply
1. Behavioral Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Very useful.
Map:
Where students spend time
Congested areas
Frequently visited machines
Waiting locations
Collaboration zones
Example
Workbench A↑10 students stop
Laser Cutter↑Queue forms here
Sink↑People clean models
This immediately shows activity patterns.
2. Cognitive Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Ask students:
Draw the lab from memory.
Interesting findings:
Which machines are remembered?
Which storage locations are forgotten?
Where do students think tools are?
Which zones are mentally important?
This reveals mental organization of the workspace.
3. Workflow Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Probably the most valuable tool.
Example:
Receive assignment↓Select material↓Find tools↓Measure↓Cut↓Assemble↓Test↓Modify↓Clean
Now identify:
delays
errors
frustrations
repeated actions
4. Journey Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Example journey:
"I need to make a foam model."
Steps
Enter lab↓Find foam↓Locate cutter↓Wait↓Cut↓Glue↓Sand↓Store model↓Clean workspace
Pain points become very obvious.
5. Stakeholder Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Who influences the experience?
Students
Faculty
Lab technician
Workshop assistant
Housekeeping
Safety officer
Students often forget that multiple stakeholders shape a system.
6. Affinity Mapping ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
After interviews
Cluster observations:
Storage↓Safety↓Waiting↓Instructions↓Materials↓Lighting
Patterns emerge naturally.
7. Service Blueprint (Advanced)
Good if you want students to understand systems.
Visible actions
Student asks technician
Invisible actions
Technician updates inventory
Support systems
Purchasing
Maintenance
Timetable
8. Experience Mapping
Instead of workflow, examine emotions.
Example
Excited↓Confused↓Waiting↓Focused↓Satisfied↓Frustrated (cleanup)
Students learn that experiences are emotional, not just functional.
Interview Questions
Instead of asking:
"Do you like the lab?"
Ask:
Walk me through your last lab session.
What was the first thing you did?
What interrupted your work?
Where do you usually waste time?
Which tools are hardest to find?
When do you ask for help?
Which part of the process is most enjoyable?
Which task feels repetitive?
If you changed one thing in the lab, what would it be?
Observation Checklist
Observe:
✓ Movement
✓ Waiting
✓ Searching
✓ Asking questions
✓ Tool sharing
✓ Congestion
✓ Cleanup
✓ Safety behaviour
✓ Communication
Best Mapping Combination for a 7-Day Module
I would require every group to produce the following:
Tool Why it fits
Stakeholder Map Understand who is involved in the lab ecosystem
Workflow Map Visualize the sequence of tasks and identify bottlenecks
Tool Why it fits
Behavioral Map Show how people actually use the physical space
Journey Map Capture one user's end-to-end experience during a lab activity
Affinity Diagram Synthesize interview and observation data into themes
Represent a key user type (e.g., novice student, experienced maker,
Persona
lab technician)
Opportunity Statements ("How Might
Translate research insights into design opportunities
We...")
Notice that cognitive mapping is optional here. It is extremely valuable for projects where people's mental
models are central—such as campus wayfinding or navigating a hospital. In a product design lab, the
stronger emphasis is typically on workflow, physical movement, interactions, and collaboration. Students
certainly have mental models of where tools or materials are located, but the richest insights usually come
from watching what they actually do rather than what they remember.
For your course, this project has another advantage: unlike campus wayfinding, it exposes students to
researching complex work practices. They learn to study not only individual users but also interactions
between people, tools, spaces, processes, and policies—an essential capability in product and service
design.
Yes—in fact, this is a stronger research design than having both groups study the same student experience.
It introduces students to an important concept in design research: different stakeholders can experience
the same system in very different ways.
Rather than assigning different physical areas, assign different user perspectives.
Overall Project Theme
"Understanding the Product Design Lab Ecosystem"
Group 1: Student Experience
Research Question:
How do students experience the product design lab while completing a project?
Focus areas:
Finding materials and tools
Learning to use equipment
Waiting for machines
Collaborating with peers
Seeking help
Safety awareness
Cleanup
Storage of ongoing work
Research Methods
Contextual interviews
Observation
Journey mapping
Behavioral mapping
Workflow mapping
Affinity diagram
Persona
Journey Example
Receive assignment → Enter lab → Find materials → Gather tools → Prototype → Test → Store model →
Clean up
Group 2: Lab Technician Experience
Research Question:
How do lab technicians manage, support, and maintain the lab while serving students?
Focus areas:
Preparing the lab before classes
Managing inventory
Tool maintenance
Machine scheduling
Assisting students
Monitoring safety
Handling damaged equipment
Cleaning and organizing
Research Methods
Contextual interviews
Shadowing (following the technician during a session)
Workflow mapping
Stakeholder mapping
Service blueprint
Affinity diagram
Workflow Example
Open lab → Prepare tools → Issue equipment → Supervise work → Troubleshoot → Collect tools → Inspect
→ Store → Maintain machines
Comparing the Two Perspectives
Student Perspective Lab Technician Perspective
Completing a project Supporting many projects simultaneously
Wants quick access to tools Wants tools returned correctly
Wants flexibility Needs safety and order
Focused on creativity Focused on maintenance and workflow
Uses the lab Operates the lab
This comparison often reveals conflicting needs, which is a valuable lesson in product and service design.
For example:
Students may want tools freely accessible.
Technicians may prefer controlled access to prevent loss or damage.
Neither perspective is "right" or "wrong"; the design challenge is balancing both.
Mapping Tools
Student Group
✔ Journey Map
✔ Behavioral Map
✔ Workflow Map
✔ Affinity Diagram
✔ Persona
Technician Group
✔ Workflow Map ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (essential)
✔ Stakeholder Map ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
✔ Service Blueprint ⭐⭐⭐⭐
✔ Affinity Diagram
✔ Behavioral Map (where does the technician spend time?)
Final Class Activity
This is where the project becomes particularly valuable.
Ask both groups to present together and compare:
Student says... Technician says...
"Tools are hard to find." "Students return tools to the wrong place."
"The laser cutter always has a queue." "Only one technician is trained to operate it."
"We don't know where materials are kept." "Students don't read the storage labels."
"The lab feels crowded." "Projects are due on the same day, causing peak demand."
Students begin to see that a design problem is rarely caused by a single factor—it often emerges from
interactions between people, processes, resources, and policies.
One refinement I'd suggest
Instead of calling one group "students" and the other "lab technicians," frame them as studying two
complementary journeys:
Group 1: The Product Design Student Journey – from receiving a design brief to completing a
prototype.
Group 2: The Lab Operations Journey – from preparing the lab for use to restoring it after use.
This subtle change encourages students to think in terms of activities and experiences rather than simply
interviewing two categories of people. It also highlights that good user research often requires
understanding multiple stakeholders within the same system—a key principle that will prepare them for
later courses in systems thinking and service design.
For a User Research and Analysis course, the design lab project should culminate in insights (what students
learned about users) and How Might We (HMW) statements (opportunities for design). The HMWs should
not prescribe solutions; they should open up possibilities.
Below are examples for both the student experience and the lab technician experience.
Group 1: Product Design Lab – Student Experience
Theme 1: Finding Tools and Materials
Observations
Students spend time searching for tools.
They ask classmates where items are kept.
Different batches return tools to different locations.
Insight
Students rely more on peer knowledge and memory than on the lab's storage system to locate tools.
HMW
How might we help students locate tools independently?
How might we reduce the time spent searching for materials?
Theme 2: Learning and Confidence
Observations
Students hesitate before using unfamiliar machines.
Many wait for faculty or technicians before starting.
Insight
Students value confidence and reassurance before using equipment, even when instructions are available.
HMW
How might we help first-time users feel confident operating lab equipment?
How might we support independent learning while maintaining safety?
Theme 3: Workspace Organization
Observations
Tables become cluttered during projects.
Students frequently move between storage and work areas.
Insight
The workspace does not adequately support the evolving needs of a project as it progresses.
HMW
How might we help students organize materials throughout a project?
How might we reduce unnecessary movement during prototyping?
Theme 4: Collaboration
Observations
Teams gather around limited workbenches.
Some members wait while one person performs the task.
Insight
The physical workspace influences how effectively teams collaborate and participate.
HMW
How might we create workspaces that support active participation by all team members?
How might we improve collaboration around shared tools and work areas?
Theme 5: Waiting
Observations
Students queue for popular machines.
Waiting time is unpredictable.
Insight
Uncertainty about machine availability interrupts students' workflow more than the actual waiting time.
HMW
How might we make equipment availability more visible?
How might we reduce interruptions caused by waiting?
Theme 6: Cleanup
Observations
Cleanup is rushed at the end of the session.
Tools are not always returned to their correct locations.
Insight
Cleanup is perceived as the end of the project rather than an integral part of the making process.
HMW
How might we encourage consistent cleanup habits?
How might we make tool return easier and more intuitive?
Group 2: Product Design Lab – Lab Technician Experience
Theme 1: Supporting Students
Observations
Technicians answer the same questions repeatedly.
Students seek help even for routine tasks.
Insight
Technicians spend a significant amount of time providing repetitive guidance instead of focusing on
technical support.
HMW
How might we reduce repetitive queries without reducing access to help?
How might we enable students to solve common problems independently?
Theme 2: Tool Management
Observations
Tools are returned to incorrect locations.
Some tools are missing at the start of sessions.
Insight
Maintaining tool organization depends heavily on technician effort rather than on user behaviour.
HMW
How might we make correct tool return the easiest option?
How might we improve visibility of shared equipment?
Theme 3: Peak Workload
Observations
Many requests occur at the beginning and end of lab sessions.
Multiple students require assistance simultaneously.
Insight
Technician workload is concentrated around predictable peak periods rather than being evenly distributed.
HMW
How might we smooth demand for technician support?
How might we prioritize assistance during peak periods?
Theme 4: Safety
Observations
Technicians frequently remind students about PPE and safe practices.
Safety instructions are sometimes overlooked when students are focused on completing work.
Insight
Students' focus on task completion can compete with attention to safety practices.
HMW
How might we make safe behaviours a natural part of the workflow?
How might we reinforce safety without relying solely on verbal reminders?
Theme 5: Lab Readiness
Observations
Technicians prepare tools and materials before sessions.
Delays occur when equipment requires maintenance.
Insight
The quality of students' lab experience depends on substantial preparation that is largely invisible to them.
HMW
How might we improve visibility of equipment availability?
How might we reduce disruptions caused by maintenance or setup?
Combined System-Level Insights
These emerge when both groups compare findings.
Student Insight Technician Insight System-Level Insight
Tools are hard to Tools are often returned The challenge is not only storage but also maintaining
find. incorrectly. shared organization.
Machine demand peaks
Students wait for Equipment availability is influenced by scheduling as well
around assignment
machines. as capacity.
deadlines.
Students ask for The same questions are Opportunities exist to improve onboarding and self-
help frequently. repeated every session. service support.
The workspace is designed for making but may not
Workspaces become Cleanup takes significant
adequately support transitions between making, storing,
cluttered. effort after sessions.
and cleaning.
Students are unsure Technicians constantly Safety communication should be embedded into the user
about safety. monitor safe practices. experience, not treated as a separate activity.
Teaching Tip: Observations → Insights → HMW
A useful framework for your students is:
Observation Insight How Might We
Students ask where Students depend on informal How might we help students find tools
tools are kept. knowledge to locate shared resources. independently?
Students wait for the Uncertainty about availability disrupts How might we make equipment availability
laser cutter. workflow. more predictable?
Tables become Projects evolve faster than workspaces How might we support changing
cluttered. can adapt. workspace needs during prototyping?
This progression teaches students that:
Observations describe what happened.
Insights explain why it matters.
How Might We statements identify where design can create value, without jumping straight to a
specific solution.
This habit of moving systematically from evidence to opportunity is one of the most important skills they'll
develop in user research.