Background: Friday Saturday participated in a structured thinking course training. The participants were much more than the product manager, but thanks to the great toil the monkeys always fought for our minions to get the chance. My group has 3 product managers, 1 interactive designers, 1 development engineers, and I and Monkey total 1 user researchers. In the two-day training in a number of groups in practice, our group inexplicably each time first. Record our experience in the last and most difficult game (because of the number adjustment, the development engineer and a product manager did not participate in this competition, the monkey's wife on the top).
Match goal : get the highest score
Race Preparation :
1.6 participants per group, 10 cards per person to 1-10 card
3. Each group has 30 minutes to discuss, and to be issued to facilitate a stack, a large white paper, A4 Papers, pens a number of
Game Process :
1.1 (Commander) facing large screen, 5 people (masses) back to the big screen;
2. Each round begins, the large screen will randomly display a number between 6-60;
3. The whole group stood up at the same time, each holding a card held aloft, and the number of cards and the numbers on the screen;
4. Referee audit, grading, start next round;
5. A total of 10 rounds, 5 rounds, each group 1 people exit, points range to 5-50
Game Rules :
1. Only the commanding officer can look at the screen, but not the voice. Tell the crowd
2. Each round of the fastest stand and the right group to get 3 points, the second 2 points, the third 1 points, points and error deduction 3 points. Each group can choose to hand over some of the cards, each 4 (regardless of points) for 1 points.
The result is that our group won a lot of points to win the second place. But after comparison found that we are the 5 Group of the Most backward algorithm (the instructor in the summary of repeated 15 times!) So why do we win? The analysis may have three aspects:
- Strategy : Identifying the right child goals and concerns
- process : Good teamwork, effective time management and resource allocation
- Tip : A tool that has high availability and low risk when executed
About the process left to how,ing and monkey total supplements, this article talks about 1 and 3. To illustrate, the author intends to discuss the value of user-centric as attitude/viewpoint/Perspective (Perspective) rather than the optimal winning scheme. There are many flaws in the following scheme, but I hope readers don't get bogged down in the details of how to solve problems.
If the sound and efficient algorithm (refers to see the number of figures after the rapid calculation of what each should be a card) compared to the system's technology, function, the other has the strength of Google, we are half human flesh cottage company. But strategically , we're centered on everyone in the group, not the algorithm (UCD, not SCD). We are more concerned with the communication between people and systems: how to present the algorithm in a usable way, providing an easy-to-use interaction to achieve:
- Efficient and accurate information transmission between commanders and the masses
- Easy-to-use operating process (selection, lifting)
So we quickly identified the algorithm and did 3 things:
1. Create an Easy-to-use presentation layer and interactive operation : We hope that the algorithm can be effective by the public (user) understanding, use. The image below is the "presentation layer" of our algorithm--making a table on a large white paper.
· Cell displays all possible numbers in sequence
· After seeing the numbers on the screen, the commander will stick to the figures in the table, the crowd, the commander of the corresponding ranks
· The first column, the tail column represents the crowd to raise the card number, two columns are the same 6 digits 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10. Considering that 1 the commanding officer is in the opposite direction to the crowd; 2 everyone on the table should see clearly; 3 each line is very long--we mark points with orange-red post-it notes, and attach a post-it note to the direction of the masses , respectively.
· The first line of 1-10 represents the remainder to be lifted by the commander, while in practice, the cards are placed directly on the numbers.
For example, 18 appears on the screen. At this point, the commander points the convenience sticker to 18, then he goes to the intersection of the 18 column and the first line (that is, 3). The masses go to the intersection of 18 rows and the first/Hurie (ie, 3). Then they raised their cards.
The attention to the readability of the expressive layer and the ease of operation of the interactive process helps us to win with the chicken algorithm.
2. Help users learn : let users know how to use the presentation layer. After completing the form, we quickly launched a number of rounds of exercises to check if the form was easy enough to ensure that everyone knew how to use it and how to use it skillfully.
3. Focus on the user's feelings . The atmosphere of the game makes users feel nervous, we encourage each other to refuel, to emphasize trust (especially to commanders), and not to seek the quickest but most stable principle.
In the 10 round, most of US rounds second, but because of stability, no mistake, successfully got the first. A more efficient team, one team has a very high error rate, the other team is too inefficient (they make a watch on A4 paper, only the commander can see it), and two teams jam at the commander's signal to the crowd.
In a word , sometimes time, human resources and other decisions you can not have the best of the most powerful function, technology, but if you understand the most fundamental needs of users, and efforts to help TA easily complete the task, to achieve the goal, then not necessarily is not competitive. Of course, if the two can be combined, it would be best. In this case, our group does not think of the optimal algorithm, but we all hope that the accurate and robust licensing this demand, provided a convenient tool to create a sense of relief, and finally achieved the goals of the people.