Feedback – it’s a curious thing. One of the things we have had to do is comment on other teams sites, both informally as part of the Open Design Studio showcase, and more formally running through each others rules of thumb heuristic walkthroughs.
In the early stages of our project we had a number of nice and positive comments, these encouraged us as we found our feet and worked out what was going on. But now the site is up for evaluation I’ve found “good job” statements less useful. I am not sure if these were about form or substance, especially when we know that our necessary shortcuts have left room for improvement.
We’ve been grateful for two meaty evaluations with practical points for improvements, just what we needed. Being defensive is just daft, it denies easy learning. At work I have been doing some WebPA testing for the Celtic II project. We are one of their pilot sites and have been giving it some welly – my objective to protect our users (academics) from grief. I’ve reported a couple of new problems which were met with THANKS, much better for me to find the issues and give diagnostics, test resolutions than have future users lose faith in the technology.
With this in mind the TMA asks me to review the comments that I have made on ODS. As a team we have had a concerted effort to comment, and this has resulted in some useful discussion points for us. Putting my comments in a table I am struck by the fact that they I are largely insubstantial and fluffy (if encouraging). I’ve taken good ideas, but not risked (or taken the time) to challenge. A real learning point – take it over the fluffy threshold.
Sportsmen inevitably do well on Strictly, they are really good at receiving feedback. Coaches are equally good at framing it. Trust, and lack of additional agenda is needed. Here’s one of the nice things about sitting behind a password protected wall, we can build trust and practice giving and receiving feedback.