What I liked?

(1) Citing the cyclists statistics really helps to foresee how big of a problem bicycle helmets are and how any design improvements will affect a significant number of users.

(2) Interviewing spectrum of users: from daily commuters to infrequent bike riders. This really helps to get feedback from diverse set of users regarding using the helmet - about their experience, needs and what kind of improvements do they want.

Potential improvements

(1) The three biggest issues could be further elaborated and explained with help of specific examples. For example, why helmet portability is a big challenge - is the weight of a bicycle helmet or the shape that makes it cumbersome to carry. Why helmets are inefficient - is the time it takes to put it on and off that makes it inefficient or something else.

(2) A more detailed solution to the problem would have been better. Things to consider - how is the collapsing mechanism going to work: make use of sketches or pictures to communicate the concept design to the readers. Which type of synthetic material will the new helmet be made of and why the material is better - is it a form of shape-memory material and how will it adapt to user's head shape.

return to top of page

This analysis of bike helmets does present some interesting facts and findings, but it is not thorough enough to make me understand how the proposed solution would solve the problems presented. This is mostly because there are no supporting pictures or graphics. The user experience tab is the best; the number of similar responses from interviewees really highlights some of the shortcoming of helmets. The inclusion of statistics is a nice touch, but some additional statistics and figures would be nice in the introduction to really make the viewer understand the helmet market and current state-of-the-art (especially because it is stated that we should "try to give context to the importance of helmets" and "why the growth potential exists", and then only presents one line of statistics!)

My major suggestion would be to include some relevant pictures - especially of your users, different types of bike helmets and their components, older versus newer bike helmets and a drawing of your solution - so that your analysis is supported visually. It would elevate your current content to make viewers better understand what you are describing. Another suggestion is to go into depth about the problems of current helmets by analyzing the current features of a helmet that contribute to these problems. For instance, if portability is a problem, what is the footprint of a current helmet? Similarly, what is meant by "feasibility" as a problem in terms of the current helmets?

return to top of page

The analysis begins with real human experiences. This "listening to the customer" approach was clever and helps to legitimize the analysis. The jump to the Benefits section could provide a bit more nuance than it currently does: whereas the analysis suggests that the benefits are gleaned from the user interviews, it would be more enlightening to compare/contrast the benefits proclaimed by a helmet manufacturer (or by public safety officials) versus those perceived by users. This is somewhat raised in the Problems section, though the synthesis between user research and secondary research could be made more clear.

The analysis provides a very specific solution - almost a startup pitch - rather than addressing the contrast between the intent of design features and user experience with those features. One strong recommendation would be to focus more on the incremental improvements that a helmet manufacturer could make relative to the current design, as opposed to replacing the helmet as we know it altogether.

Another recommendation would be the use of media (e.g., images, video) to more clearly illustrate the user challenges described within the analysis.

return to top of page

I really like the user interviews (including the self-experience) on the "Experience" page; this really helps to fulfill the assignment's point about actually seeing how users interact with the product. There is also a lot of good background material which helps to corroborate the points about the user-base, the importance of the solution, etc. The analysis definitely fulfills all the requirements of the assignment.

I think the "Problems" page could be fleshed out a bit more to be more specific about the reasons that the current bicycle helmet is an inferior product. This material is present in the user interviews, but it would be helpful to have a list of problems synthesized and presented in some visual way to help understand exactly what is wrong with the product design.

I would also suggest adding more detail to the proposed solution page to further catalog exactly how the proposed changes will result in an improved user experience (i.e. how the new product will be used in a different way).

return to top of page

What I liked?

(1) The content is clear, concise, and easy to read. The font style, font size, and font color of the website is simple and easily readable. The website works well without any issues and easy to navigate.

(2) Citing references - a good thing as user's to access those references and read more those subjects if they want.

Potential improvements

(1) Text width of the website runs from end-to-end and makes it a bit difficult and slow to read the content. Think of applying a maximum text width such that all the content of the website is centered on the webpage and attracts users attention immediately.

(2) Make use of pictures and sketches to communicate the problems and concept solution.

(3) Content was full on text - very important to space the content with images, graphs, animation or videos to grab user's attention and keep them interested in your content.

return to top of page

The presented analysis is overall clear and straightforward to follow, but needs more images. There are some typos as well as extra sentences that don't add anything to the analysis (such as "That is the focal point that must be fixed" on the problems page) and take away from the point of the analysis. The simplistic color scheme of the website makes it easy to view, while the tab layout really helps to guide the viewer through the progression of the analysis. The text takes up the entire width of any screen that I view it on, which makes the text harder to read. Playing with the margins or padding of your elements in HTML to center the text more towards the middle could help make the pages easier to read. It'd also be nice if the title of the analysis stood out a little bit more, maybe through a different color or text font.

return to top of page

The website is simple but elegant. The tabs at the top of the page are intuitive, and it is helpful that all tabs remain visible even as the user browses around between them. The tabs are also ordered in a logical sequential manner. The greyscale color choice is easy on the eyes, with appropriate use of contrast for readability in a variety of environments.

As is mentioned above, a picture is worth a thousand words, not only to help illustrate points of the analysis, but also to break up the monotony of text and provide some aesthetic benefits to the page.

return to top of page

The text is clear and the color scheme creates a consistent visual appeal. The navigation bar is useful and aesthetically pleasing, and since the text never requires the user to scroll, it always sits at the same place.

My main suggestion is adding more visual aids to make the website more visually intriguing: pictures of the helmet and the specific design features which show need for improvement, people using the helmet and running into the difficulties mentioned in the analysis, and other pictures that would add some color and variety to the assignment.

Also, when viewed full screen, the text takes up the entire width of the screen, which can make it difficult for someone reading the page to follow along; the text might look better if it was constrained to the middle 50% of the screen, for example. More CSS elements could be used to clean up the presentation of the text as well, e.g. the capitals and arrows of the "Benefits" page.

return to top of page