# Generative research ## Digitizing continuous learning ### A real-world case study at ONE ![[ONE.png]] ## 1. Context ![[Atlas/Images/UXR Portfolio/img/Context-ONE.png]] ### About the organization **ONE (Office de la Naissance et de l’Enfance) is the official body in the French-speaking community of Belgium for all matters related to childhood.** Its domains range from childcare (crèches/daycare centers) to out-of-school care, plus health promotion and many other child-focused services. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Panwe8hLrfI?si=f2zOY3sA4xAqwjVV" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe> In 2023, the organization embarked on a **major digital transformation** to modernize its administrative processes and services. The goal was to simplify how staff and beneficiaries engage with ONE’s numerous offerings, **reinforcing ONE’s position as a trusted reference** in childcare and children’s well-being. ### The project: FORCO (Formation Continue) Within the digital transformation at ONE, I focused on a project called **FORCO** (**FOR**mation **CO**tinue, or **Continuous education** in English). Continuous education aims to enhance the quality of childcare by supporting the professional development of early childhood professionals (childcare workers, nurses in crèches, etc.). Traditionally, these training sessions have been listed and managed through printed catalogs. ![[Programme Petite Enfance 2023-2024.pdf]] The FORCO project was split into three main phases. **Phase 3**, which I will detail here, centered on **improving the experience for training “beneficiaries,”** which are the people who participate in these training sessions. The intent was to create a simpler, more accessible enrollment process - potentially via a digital catalog - while giving training operators the tools to manage registrations and attendance seamlessly. ![[Inscriptions Petite Enfance 2023-2024.pdf]] ### Opportunity Historically, most user research at ONE was evaluative. This time, the opportunity was to **conduct a generative research** first, before building anything new, **to ensure any future digital solution would actually solve real needs and mitigate business risks**. ![[Opportunity-ONE 1.svg]] ## 2. My Role ![[Role-ONE.png]] I joined FORCO at the stage where the Product Owner (PO) and her team were **planning the “Phase 3” product roadmap**. They knew that in about three months, they might digitize the printed training catalog. However, they lacked clarity on user needs, the actual “on-the-ground” process of signing up for training, and whether a digital catalog was truly the best solution. ### Intake Document Because **ONE** is large with many intermediaries and unclear communication lines, the first thing I did was create and share an **intake document**. ![[UXResearchIntake-ONE.pdf]] - This document included a set of questions to clarify the purpose, scope, and goals of the research. - It helped me align with key stakeholders who themselves were not always sure **what** they wanted to learn about the user experience. - I then conducted brief stakeholder interviews to gather input for this intake document. ### Research Plan Once we clarified the request, I drafted a **research plan**. **The goal was to establish a reference framework** that clearly outlines the expected results and deliverables, serving as **a communication and alignment tool to ensure that these results effectively meet the essential needs of the stakeholders involved**. ![[UXResearchPlan-ONE.pdf]] ### RACI Map I also clarified roles of the the stakeholders involved using a **RACI** matrix for the study. - **Responsible (R)**: Quentin (UX Researcher) - **Accountable (A)**: Sylvie (ONE's Product Owner), Jerry (Proxy PO), Jean-Phi (Business Analyst) - **Consulted (C)**:  AEI (Pro), MA( Pro), ACA/CAL (Office) - **Informed (I)**: Manel, Gab, Mathieu, Michel, Renaud, Alex (Developers), Thomas, Raph (UXD), Mathilde (UXR), Olivier (Scrum Master) My role focused on orchestrating the **entire user research process**: from **planning**, **conducting**, and **activating the Research**. ![[RACI-ONE.png]] ## 3. Timeline ![[Timeline-ONE.png]] I planned a roughly **8-week** schedule, divided into four parts: | Task | Duration | Start | End | | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ------------ | ------------ | | Define participants, recruit, and create interview/test guides | 2 weeks | Feb 8, 2024 | Feb 22, 2024 | | Conduct interviews (semi-structured) and questionnaires | 2 weeks | Feb 22, 2024 | Mar 7, 2024 | | Field studies, usability tests, and continuous data analysis | 2 weeks | Mar 7, 2024 | Mar 21, 2024 | | Finalize research, synthesize data, craft deliverables, and present insights | 2 weeks | Mar 21, 2024 | Apr 4, 2024 | ![[Timeline-ONE2.png]] ## 4. Research Statement and Goals ![[ResearchStatement-ONE.png]] ### Research statement The research statement was the research problem or question we were trying to answer. Basically, **what we were trying to learn about our users**. It represented the central question that should have been answered through specific research goals. - We wanted to understand **how the different sectors** (APE/APL/PSE/Volontaires) **make decisions about training enrollment** so that we can **improve the training catalog** and **evaluate its need for digitization**. ![[ResearchStatement2-ONE.png]] ### Research goals The research goals were **the different areas we aimed to explore** during our study. They directly related to the research statement above. We wanted to: - 1. **Evaluate** how different user segments currently interact with the **printed training catalog**. - 2. **Reveal** the tools (email, paper forms, fax, etc.) that these segments use to sign up and explore their experiences and pain points. - 3. **Identify** the biggest **frustrations and barriers** in the training enrollment process and explore how people would like to see improvements, digital or otherwise. ![[ResearchGoals-ONE.png]] ## 5. Research Methodology ![[ResearchMethodology-ONE.png]] Given the initial logistical constraints (in-person usability tests and contextual inquiries were difficult to organize), I opted for **remote semi-structured interviews** focused on the user journey to gather rich and actionable insights. ### 1. (Planned) Usability Testing on the Paper Catalog Initially, I wanted to conduct **usability tests** on the physical training catalog to see how staff read and used it to sign up. However, doing in-person testing throughout Belgium’s childcare facilities was **too time-consuming** and **logistically challenging**. ![[ResearchMethodology1-ONE.png]] ### 2. (Planned) Contextual Inquiry and Online Survey Similarly, I planned **field visits** to observe how sign-ups happened in context. We also considered an **online questionnaire** to gather quantitative data from a larger sample. Both ideas ran into significant **logistical hurdles**: many childcare staff do not have direct computer access at work; smartphones often remain “in lockers” while they care for kids and obtaining valid email addresses was also complex. ![[ResearchMethodology2-ONE.png]] ### 3. Semi-Structured Interviews Ultimately, the **core method** that succeeded was remote **semi-structured interviews** with a user-journey focus. ![[ResearchMethodology3-ONE.png]] Despite the initial desire for multiple methods (usability testing, field visits, surveys), remote **semi-structured interviews** became the most feasible way to capture relevant data given the constraints. ![[ResearchMethodology4-ONE.png]] ## 6. Recruitment ![[Recruitment-ONE.png]] We selected **participants representative of the four key sectors** (APE, ATL, PSE, and volunteers) and **from various geographical regions**. Given the organizational challenges, we used a **top-down approach** through the Product Owner to **facilitate contacts** and **ensure a better response rate**. ### Who we needed We needed participants from each major sector: - A. Sector **APE (A**ccueil **P**etite **E**nfance) / Early Childhood Care: - childcare professionals for ages 0–3. ![[Recruitment1-ONE.png]] - B. Sector **ATL (A**ccueil **T**emps **L**ibre) / Out-of-School Care: - those organizing out-of-school activities for ages 3–12. ![[Recruitment2-ONE.png]] - C. Sector **PSE** (**P**romotion de la **S**anté à l'**É**cole / Health Promotion in Schools: - staff who work in school-based health promotion. ![[Recruitment3-ONE.png]] - D. Sector **Volunteers**: - individuals supporting ONE missions on a volunteer basis. ![[Recruitment4-ONE.png]] ### Why these participants We suspected each sector might have distinct rules for enrolling in training, but we were uncertain **who handled sign-ups**: the manager, the nurse, or the staff themselves? We also wanted diversity in **geographical location** (Brussels, urban and rural areas) to see how **resource availability** and **daily workflow might differ**. ![[RecruitmentGeographic-ONE.png]] We targeted participants who: - Had **already enrolled** in at least one continuing education course in the past. - Had used the **paper catalog** for course info. - Planned to take additional training in the next 6–12 months. ### Recruitment process As an external consultant to ONE, the participants **didn’t know who I was**. So, we relied on the directors and coordinators from each sector, **who then reached out to potential participants** ![[RecruitmentProcess-ONE.png]] ### Challenges The communication chain turned out to be long. An email sent to the directors took weeks to reach the relevant people. Since scheduling the interviews took longer than expected, my fellow UXR Mathilde also conducted some interviews. Thanks to her help, we still reached data saturation by conducting 50 interviews. ## 7. Sample Interview Questions ![[InterviewQuestions-ONE.png]] The **semi-structured interviews** combined participants’ freedom of expression with a structured approach to help guide the discussion. Several themes (communication about the training offer, enrollment process, overall experience, etc.) helped shape a few key questions such as: • “What were your goals when you first became interested in training?” • “How did you first hear about the training sessions offered by ONE?” • “Which channels did you use to register for the training of your choice?” • “What was the main obstacle that almost prevented you from registering for the training?” • “If you could change just one thing about the communication and/or registration process for ONE’s training sessions, what would it be?” The interviews lasted **around 60 minutes**, followed by a **30-minute debriefing session**. ![[InterviewQuestions2-ONE.png]] ## 8. Analysis and Synthesis Process ![[AnalysisSynthesis-ONE.png]] ### Taxonomy I created a **taxonomy** in the powerful research tool [Usedge](<[Usedge](https://usedge.com/)>), to **systematically categorize the collected data**. Here are some of the tags: - **Painpoints**: - barrier, discoverability, lack of information - **Persona**: - needs, motivations, tasks, tools - **Customer Journey**: - phases, steps, touchpoints, opportunities ![[AnalysisSynthesis2-ONE.png]] ### Debrief Each interview was followed by a quick debrief with my colleague to **capture immediate highlights** (key takeaways) using affinity diagrams in FigJam ![[AnalysisSynthesis3-ONE.png]] ### Analysis - I then uploaded the interview recordings into Usedge **to generate the transcripts**, then **tagged key user quotes according to the predefined taxonomy**. ![[AnalysisSynthesis4-ONE.png]] ### Synthesis Once all the interviews were completed, I cross-referenced the quick debrief notes with the more structured analysis from **tagging in Usedge**. I then **exported all the data into FigJam** to group it into **thematic categories**. The goal? To **surface shared insights** across participants. ![[AnalysisSynthesis5-ONE.png]] ## 9. Outputs and Deliverables ![[Outputs-ONE.png]] ### User Journey Map I gathered all the insights collected in the field into a **comprehensive user journey map**. This work helped me precisely identify the key moments where users encountered difficulties. Moreover, this visual approach allowed us to better understand the different steps experienced by users based on their profiles — from **planning** to **training registration**. ![[ExperienceMap-ONE.png]] ### Painpoints → Opportunités Placing these pain points directly on the **Experience Map** allowed me to identify design opportunities in the form of **How Might We** questions. ![[ExperienceMap2-ONE.png]] In other words, it helped generate innovative ideas by **turning problems into design opportunities**. ### Opportunity Matrix Then, I mapped each **How Might We** insight along two axes: - **Value to the user** (saving time, reducing frustration etc) - **Value to the business** (increasing the number of enrollments, reducing manual administrative work etc) This matrix guided the **prioritization** for the product roadmap. ![[opportunityMatrix-ONE.png]] ## 10. Impact ![[Impact-ONE.png]] The research **aligned** user needs with ONE’s broad **business objectives** of modernizing the training process. Some of the **immediate impacts** included: - **Refined Communication Strategy**: The training team recognized how crucial it is to highlight key info—like training dates, location, and available slots—because many participants were confused or missed out due to location or scheduling issues. - - **Product Roadmap Alignment**: The FORCO development team used the **journey map** insights to plan early features: e.g., a digital sign-up page or a simplified paper form for those lacking digital tools. - **Risk Mitigation**: Rather than building a digital catalog blindly, ONE saw how some staff struggled with technology. They planned **change management** steps—like training for employees or local administrative support—before rolling out a full online system. ## 11. Next Steps and Recommendations ![[NextSteps-ONE.png]] After completing the analysis, we organized an **activation workshop** with the entire FORCO team (P.O., B.A., designers, developers, etc.). We: 1. **Walked through** the journey map and the primary pain points. 2. **Brainstormed** solutions (“How might we make training locations more accessible?” “How might we address small crèches with fewer resources?”). 3. **Prioritized** near-term fixes vs. longer-term strategic updates. A few **key opportunities** surfaced: 1. **Level the Playing Field for Small Crèches** - Small centers often lack staff or technical resources, limiting their access to training. - We recommended further investigation into how to tailor sign-up processes (maybe phone-based) for them or help them with group registrations. 2. **Improve Location Accessibility** - Many found traveling long distances for training a major barrier. - Potential solutions included rotating training locations or offering more **online modules**. 3. **Solve Team Training Logistics** - Scheduling a whole team to attend together was a big headache. - We recommended exploring new training formats (weekend/evening classes, micro-learning modules, or an on-site trainer) that reduce logistical strain. ## 12. Reflections ![[Reflections-ONE.png]] **What went well** - **Planning & Alignment Tools**: The **intake document** and **research plan** were lifesavers. They established clarity from the start, forcing everyone to articulate research goals. - **Journey Mapping**: Focusing interviews around a “user journey” gave us a direct route to capture frustrations and ideas. Stakeholders loved the final **experience map**; it was an easy way to visualize user pain points and potential solutions. **Challenges** - **Stakeholder Uncertainty**: Many stakeholders had never experienced generative research. They struggled to articulate what they wanted. I spent significant time **educating** them on the value of an upfront discovery process. - **Recruitment Delays**: Because we depended on top-down communication via ONE directors, it took weeks for participants to respond, causing start-and-stop frustration. - **Time Constraints**: The complexity of ONE meant more “unforeseen” delays—like approvals, scheduling, and internal politics—than I initially estimated. **Lessons Learned** - **A robust research plan** (including RACI) is essential in large organizations. - Always **factor in** extra time for recruitment, especially if you’re relying on internal gatekeepers in a public institution. - Keep **stakeholders engaged**: short, frequent updates and direct involvement in workshops help them “see” the value of UX research (rather than waiting for a big final report). ## Conclusion ![[Conclusion-ONE.png]] Through **carefully planned user research**, we uncovered the real needs and pain points behind continuous education enrollment at ONE The **semi-structured interviews** and subsequent **journey map** created clarity and alignment, enabling ONE’s FORCO team to make **better-informed decisions** about digitizing their training catalog. By **centering users** instead of assumptions, ONE is far likelier to invest in a tool that truly works—both for the staff and the organization’s larger business goals. > **Key takeaway**: Aligning **business objectives** with **user needs** is not just about building a digital product; it’s about asking the right questions, removing internal silos, and creating a shared vision. This ensures each design or feature you launch is relevant, impactful, and sustainable.