Open ninavizz opened 5 years ago
/cc @martinshelton
Would it matter to standardize around UserFeel or UserTesting, or use them interchangeably?
For now we're standardizing on UserFeel, given that UserTesting demands a subscription for anything but bare-bones testing. Once we have the final word on discount-yes-or-no, I'll ask Ryan to purchase 15 credits for our account, for starters.
Problem(ish)
As FPF grows & establishes design and research practices, some standardized tooling paid for by FPF would help facilitate team collaboration, in addition to enabling FPF to own assets once created. Because no FOSS tools exist to adequately support either discipline, this regrettably would require some budget for paid subscriptions.
Elaborated Upon
All prototypes used for FPF user testing to-date, are on Nina's personal InVision. Which is ok by me, and imposes no cost burden to me, but it seems like it'd be easier to collaborate and share things as a team if there were a "Team" account. Website stuff could also be designed and iterated upon, perhaps a little more quickly and iteratively, if wireframes preceded code. Likewise, for testing it'd be great if we could standardize around a suite of tools (in addition to, cough, Wagtail) for remote stuff, synthesis, card-sorts, etc.
Solution
@ninavizz, @huertanix, @harrislapiroff, Martin, @eloquence and perhaps some dev peeps, could collaboratively decide what could be the most useful, make some recommendations, and then Erik factor into a budget—if this is agreed to be something folks would like to do?
Opportunities