When your business follows the seasons and you only get one shot per year
00 INTRO
The problem
When dealing with crops, you're dealing with something alive that follows the seasons of the year. Traditionally, to gain knowledge of which seeds are the most efficient in your soil, you each year grow seeds that months later either will turn out more or less efficient. Next year, you choose seeds based on the gained knowledge from previous seasons. In other words, it takes time to gain valuable knowledge.
The Norwegian crop farmer has several digital tools available for operation efficiency and crop handling, but most of them are expensive with a poor user interface. The average farmer is not too familiar with digital services and the threshold of using these complicated systems are high.
Main task
Our project was based on our client's new strategy for how to be more efficient in crop handling and management while also helping the crop farmer to rationalise his crops; how to enhance the partnership between the cooperative and the farmers?
Our main task is to create a service where the farmer gives minimal input with output that will help him be more efficient and gain valuable knowledge about his crops.
My role Timeline
Head of concept and visualisation. October 2019 - February 2020
01 TALK AND LISTEN
To gain knowledge about and empathy for the user and the industry, I conducted six interviews with different target groups and with different lengths and scopes. Here are some examples of the questions I asked:
▪ Can you tell me about your operation throughout the year?
▪ How do you plan what to grow?
▪ What tools do you use, both physical and digital?
▪ How is your process when you deliver the crops?
▪ Which steps do you take and who do you need to talk to?
▪ What are the pain points in this process?
▪ How do you plan what to grow?
▪ What tools do you use, both physical and digital?
▪ How is your process when you deliver the crops?
▪ Which steps do you take and who do you need to talk to?
▪ What are the pain points in this process?
Both qualitative and quantitative research was done, to get insights from different perspectives, and to get the feedback of a substantial number of users, a survey was sent out.
▪ 1627 respondents
▪ 94% said they miss information on which seed is the most productive in their area
▪ 43% said the booking system should improve
▪ 94% said they miss information on which seed is the most productive in their area
▪ 43% said the booking system should improve
02 DEFINE GOAL AND TARGET USER
After the interviews and the survey, the main problem to solve (our goal) and who to solve it for was defined.
The target user was translated into two personas (one of them turned out to be a less important user group for this particular solution so one persona was left to represent our user). Our users are more complex than one persona can represent, and in this case, it was more of a supporting communication tool toward stakeholders.
Goal Target User
Create a service with minimal input requirements, The average farmer with a full-time job in
and with output, that enhances efficient operation addition to the farm, with little time and few
and crop knowlegde. resources.
Create a service with minimal input requirements, The average farmer with a full-time job in
and with output, that enhances efficient operation addition to the farm, with little time and few
and crop knowlegde. resources.
03 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
During the process, I sketched a lot, and I did most sketches on the whiteboard as it lowers the barrier for including the stakeholders (the client) and let them have their input. With these types of sketches, it is easy to iterate quickly. I invited the team to share their thoughts and discuss potential solutions, as well as a dedicated resource from the client who gave expertise input.
A lot of different versions were created.
The farmers wanted something very easy. Not many of them are very tech-savvy, and to use the service, it needed to be big buttons, easy navigation and simple language. One of our hypotheses was to add a function where farmers could compare their crop outputs with an average in their area. For this, we quickly realised that it was very important to keep the results anonymous. The area needed to be big enough so that it included a sufficient number of farms so that no one could understand where the results you compared yourself to were coming from. But the area still needed to be relevant, as the soil thus the outcome differs quite a bit from area to area.
Another finding during research was that farmers wanted to be able to register their crop type and brand. We had proposed a list of crops that they can buy in Norway, but for some, that was not sufficient, as they might buy from more local dealers or import from other countries.
Booking an appointment to deliver crops to the processing factory was a pain point many of the farmers I talked to mentioned. The booking system was not easy enough, and you could only choose a day, not time which caused many farmers to go to the factory and ending up in a queue, spending too much time in a hectic period waiting to just deliver the crops.
These were some of the functions we iterated on during the project.
04 VISUALISE SOLUTION
I used PowerPoint to visualise and create wireframes for the prototype, as it is a tool everyone feels familiar with, thus lowering the barrier for input and changes along the way. Wireframes were created to communicate the ideas and solutions toward the client and first and foremost to the users. Wireframes make the discussions tangible and it’s easier to align the project members.
I created a solution for the farmers to both chose commercial crops from a list, but also to register their brand and type. The appointment booking was made simpler with a 3 step booking system, including time slots for the farmers to choose from.
The main value we wanted to provide to the farmer - knowledge of the efficiency of the crops - was one gathered in an "Insights" function. Here, the farmer could follow key figures for his crop, e.g. crop produced per area, income per area, etc. They could also deep dive further and compare how these figures compare to the average in their area (without giving away what his neighbour produced), and they would have access to tips and advice on what to do differently next year to increase their results.
05 TEST SOLUTION
To test the solution with potential users, I used inVision and Lookback to show the PowerPoint wireframes. Using Lookback, I was able to conduct the interviews on my own, as I didn't have to focus on taking notes during the interview (Lookback records and saves the interview for you to review later, see left picture).
Also, to test the hierarchy, the navigation and the names in the solution, I used OptimalWorkshop's TreeJack solution. Here, you set up your app's or website's structure, the information architecture, and then define tasks for your test users to solve, e.g. "Where would you go to register a new crop?". The outcome gives you a good indication of how easy the users find your product or service to navigate in (right picture). It helped us changing some labelling, and moving some functions to where we could see that the users were looking for that function, e.g. key figures for a specific crop were added to that crop's site in addition to an insight menu.
Through the tests, I had a lot of constructive feedback which I could use to improve the solution further. "The starting page for the seeds is a bit overwhelming", "Do not only give us the aggregated rain, we need to know when it rained as well only need the notifications from seeds relevant to me, “I really like the key figures, but I’m missing one that says how much net I’m left with", "Some confusing terms connected to the storage solution".
Based on the feedback, I pivoted the sketches made again and tested them with new farmers.
Parts of the solution were implemented in the client's current services, other parts are still on the roadmap of the client.
