An app that gives voice to the daily issues of your neighbourhood

Introduction

During the 2 and a half months that we were studying a UX/UI Design Bootcamp at UXER School, we embarked on the creation of a product that would contribute to promoting citizen participation.

Initially, we did not know that this was going to be the theme of our project, because at first, we chose Smart Cities as the main theme. But, after analyzing all the fields that are part of the Smart Cities theme, we decided to focus on the people part and, within this, we decided to focus on Citizen Participation, since we consider that it is one of the pillars that must work for a city to develop socially and improve.

• USERS: Urban citizens from 30 to 65 years old, with any level of technologies usage.
• PRODUCT: Mobile digital app.
• TEAM: Andrea Camacho (UX/UI Researcher & Designer), Itxaso Ferreras (UX/UI Designer), Julia Besada (UX/UI Designer) and Litzanna Marmolejos (UX Designer & Researcher).
• TOOLS: Slack, Miro, Hangouts, Photoshop, Figma.
• STRATEGY & METHODOLOGY: Design Thinking & Lean UX.

Our goal was to get people actively involved to improve their environment, while creating a sense of community in them.

Current context

We live in an increasingly individualistic society. Cities have become big places where everything happens very quickly. More than half of the world’s population lives in cities with more than 300,000 inhabitants, and its growth has also accelerated since the end of the last millennium, so that by 2050 this percentage will already reach 70% of the world’s population.

At the same time, cities have become cold and impersonal places. According to various studies, the risk of suffering from anxiety is 21% higher for those who live in cities, who also have a 39% increase in the incidence of mood disorders. This is due, among other things, to the accelerated pace of life, but also to the lack of human contact, isolation and the feeling of loneliness felt by many people who live in large cities. These feelings, in addition, have been increased after the COVID pandemic.

As a conclusion, it could be said that people who live in big cities miss having close relationships with which to share projects. They would like to be part of something. However, despite this, the involvement of people in citizen projects has decreased in recent years, so we were not very clear about what people think and feel about citizen participation.

Understand

Understanding the problem

To clear up clear up all the doubts that arose, we decided to use the Design Thinking method and we immersed ourselves in a research process in which we applied both qualitative and quantitative techniques. Our objectives when starting this process were:

• Understand what people think and feel about citizen participation.
• Know if they perceive needs or improvements in the environment in which they live
• Know how they get involved to improve their environment.
• Understand what they need or what they lack when participating.

Research

First of all, we started by conducting a desk research to better understand the concept of Citizen Participation and what it encompasses. To do this, we visited webs of city councils and Spain’s government, official studies and media and magazines on participation. In them we discovered the types of participation that exist, the definitions of the term, the participation data of recent years, success stories, participatory experiences and the methodologies applied in them.

We continued doing a benchmark to find out what apps or websites exist and what are they used for. Above all, we analyzed the following ones:

• Change.org
• Decide Madrid
• Citizenlab
• Civitas
• Línea verde
• ¿Tienes sal?

Most of them are portals created by the councils or municipal governments. They allow citizens to create proposals or allow incidents to be reported at a municipal level. Those that are not municipal tools, are used to obtain signatures or to contact people. However, we did not locate any platform or app that was intended for citizens to promote the community nor focused on improving neighborhoods, nor is there any tool with which they can track their created proposals: it is possible to only see the number of signatures collected, but they don’t know what happens to them after getting them.

Exploration

We continued making a mind map in order to identify the different topics that we wish to explore during the interviews.

We conducted 16 interviews with people of different ages and profiles. We were especially interested in knowing how they relate to their neighbors, what worries them, how they get involved and what would encourage them to participate more. The interviews provided us with a large amount of information that allowed us to establish initial hypotheses and detect some problems to which we could provide solutions.

The named hypotheses were:

• Citizens believe their opinions don’t count.
• People don’t know projects in which they could collaborate.
• They aro not actively involved in decision making.

After the interviews, we conducted more than 150 surveys from which we reached conclusions that helped us validate our initial hypotheses. For example: when asked how they would prefer to participate in initiatives in their neighbourhood, almost 40% answered that through a participatory app, followed by 33% who would prefer to do it through neighbourhood assemblies and 80% consider that an app that allows them to share initiatives or complaints about the neighbourhood with its neighbours would be useful (30%) or very useful (80%).

Results analysis

Once all the previous investigation has been carried out, we organized all the information obtained in a group way to be able to detect:

• Behavior patterns
• Motivations
• Frustrations
• Verbatims

Then, in a process of convergence, we were able to identify and group the problems that emerged, the different types of existing concerns or needs, and the feelings that all the participants in our research have shared.

Among the most relevant insigths, the most outstanding were:

• Most people consider themselves informed or proactive when it comes to information, however, they are not aware of nearby initiatives or how they can participate because they do not know how to access that information.
• Most of them collaborate less than they would like or would like to do it more, because they understand that if people were more involved, more things could be solved.
• They do not collaborate more actively mainly because they do not have time (family responsibilities, schedules, etc.).
• Many people feel unmotivated or disappointed when it comes to participating: they think that they will not be heard or that their protests will be of no use.
• They all detect many improvements in their environment.

DEFINE

Person

Thanks to the research, the interviews and the multiple responses obtained in the survey, we defined the archetype person that will help us understand the frustrations of our users, what could motivate them and their behavior patterns.

In this phase of convergence we meet Paula, mother of a year and a half old child, a worker and with little time to carry out activities beyond her duties and family responsibilities. Despite her pace of life, Paula would like to be more involved in her neighbourhood.

Empathy map

Once we defined our archetype, we wanted to understand how Paula felt and what she was thinking, what things frustrated and motivated her. The idea was to understand her better and empathize with her.

Customer Journey

With the customer journey we wanted to join Paula from the moment she leaves home and faces the continuous dirt on her street until she takes the initiative and expresses her complaint.

Along this path, we identified the pain points that most affected her:

• At first, she gets angry about the lack of cleanliness that her street experiences continuously and feels that she needs to get involved.
• Then, she faces confusion. Paula looks for options to express herself but feels lost and does not know how to make a complaint.
• Later, the doubt appears. Paula thinks of social networks as an option, since she does not know of a more direct and impactful medium. But, at the same time, she wonders if it will help.
• In the next stage, she decides to make her complaint but does not know if there will be more people who share her frustration or if there are already initiatives created in the neighbourhood that address the issue that concerns her.
• Finally, we find Paula’s distrust. Having already made her complaint, she does not know if she has done it well since she sees that it is not having the impact she expected and does not believe that it will reach the institution that can change things in her neighbourhood.

IDEATE

We began our design challenge after having identified our archetypal person and its problems and needs.

HMW

Once here, we used the HMW technique (How might we…?) to define our objective, identifying actions, users and expected results. It was a divergence exercise, in which each of us would define each of these components, which would conclude with convergence, since we voted for the ones that most convinced us.

Finally, we decided to merge the three HMWs into one:

How could we get people to participate without taking time, promoting a sense of community and generating results?

This was the goal we have always had in mind when coming up with our solution.

Crazy 8's

We used this technique to establish in a more detailed way what our solution idea would be like.

After an exercise of divergence like this, we presented the ideas that each of us had. We ended up converging, taking the decision to group the four ideas into one. The result was the following:

“It is an app that, using geolocation, allows the user to mark or indicate the needs, flaws or improvements in their environment. It is possible to indicate which categories interest them in order to participate and join existing proposals and even create them. The most voted or most followed initiatives will be communicated to the institutions publicly (eg, through Twitter, sending them to the relevant district boards…) and also to users.

Users will only receive the information about their neighbourhood that interests them in order to participate in what is relevant to them.

Reward: obtain points for sharing initiatives to, in this way, promote the image that being participatory generates individual and common benefit.”

Later, we discarded the idea of ​​offering a reward to users, since we consider that people will feel motivated to participate if they see that their proposals are heard.

Value Proposition and Business Model

After working through the ideation phase and getting a ton of information, we decided it was time to define our value proposition. To do this, we used several canvases in which we developed Paula’s joys, frustrations and works. In this way, we decided that our app would serve to help citizens of the same neighbourhood who want to be actively involved to reduce their discomfort and create a feeling of community, at the same time that their environment improves.

Just as important as a well-founded value proposition is having a business model that supports the entire idea. Therefore, with the help of a Business Model Canvas, we defined the way in which our app would get financed and all the expenses that will come from its maintenance.

Being a non-profit app, we discarded the idea that there are subscriptions or that people have to pay to use it. However, we have found a very important business opportunity in the information that our app collects. In this way, our main source of income would be both municipal and local political institutions for which this information can be of great help.

User stories

With the help of AGILE and SCRUM methodologies, we broke up our value proposition into smaller, more manageable pieces, better known as user stories. It is the expression of a functional increase. Each UUSS carried out corresponds to the delivery of a piece of the value proposition that makes the final product richer and complements it.

Later, we refined them through an example mapping to obtain a better performance from each one of them:

Then, we prioritized the functionalities that, depending on the UUSS that we considered most important, our MVP should have. For this we used a sequencer in which we sorted the characteristics from most to least important.

And, after this prioritization exercise, we developed our MVP, which is nothing more than an excuse to validate our hypotheses or UUSS. Typically its goal is to satisfy a user need. We developed only the characteristics that we included in the first three points of the prioritization:

This is how ParticipApp! arises, our solution, which consists of giving voice to the daily issues of the neighbourhood.

Wire and task flows

Information architectureis the structure and organization of a product. In addition to helping users find what they are looking for, it also talks about who we are, gives an overview of the product and a strategic basis. After analyzing our product needs, asking ourselves questions to understand our users, and inventorying our content, we arrived at the wire flow of our solution.

About the task flow, we designed two based on the main two task that users will do while using our product.

PROTOTYPE

Naming & Brand

Knowing clearly our target audience, market, problems and needs that we had to cover, solution and, above all our value proposition, it was time to define our brand values. We wanted to be an app that is:

• Committed with change
• Participative
• That creates community
• A meeting space between neighbours of the same locality
• Encouraging closeness
• Human
• Credible
• A loudspeaker of all citizens.

Regarding the personality of the ParticipApp! brand we define ourselves:

• Brave: we are not afraid of changes.
• Restless: we like to find out what is happening around us.
• Non-conformists: we strive to improve our environment.
• Committed: we believe in the power of unity.
• Egalitarian: all voices are equally important.
• Dynamic: nothing slows us down.
• Empathic: We are moved by people and their needs and that is why, with our application, we wanted to give them a voice. We care about people because we are too.

Finally, the name chosen was ParticipApp!, which included the core of the product, which was citizen participation, added to the mobile app as a way of expression.

Our isotype is the nexus of the P with the communication icon and the location. Three key elements in our app that also differentiate us from the competition: a participatory, communicative app with a limited location to be up to date with the latest things that happen in your neighbourhood.

Design System

One of the objectives we set ourselves to achieve this was that our app could be used and understood by everyone, regardless of their age or how well they handle apps.

To do this, in addition to using a close and familiar language, we opted for a clean design that offers the information that people are looking for in a structured way so that no one gets lost.

Our app is based on unity to achieve a common goal, that is why we have chosen purple and yellow colors because they represent power, will, optimism and friendship.

The icons help guide users, using universal metaphors that everyone can quickly identify. They are simple, friendly and close icons.

The buttons on ParticipApp! are made up of rounded edges. In this way we flee from the formalities, being in accordance with the copies that accompany them. Using purple to perform the main actions of the application such as the call to action for support, pale purple when proposals and initiatives are supported, and yellow for any highlighted action such as registering, posting a proposal or changing the display a map in the list of complaints and initiatives.

Regarding the typography, we chose Raleway for the headings and highlights and Lato for the paragraphs as the font style. They are non-serif fonts, which we found interesting because they are intelligible, full-bodied, and easily adaptable to different devices and especially for those users who have vision problems.

On the other hand, we put a lot of emphasis on the information cards and the form fields. Since it is an app created by and for the user regardless of their age, they had to be easy and intuitive.

Prototype

From our prototype, it is worth highlighting some of the elements that we have included in the product that it is what differentiates us from the rest of the existing applications about this theme.

One of them is that the user must enter their location automatically or manually. This is one of our main values since, in this way, the user will only see the proposals created in the neighbourhood in which they live or in the area of ​​interest they have selected.

In addition, the user will receive notifications about the number of supports that their proposals have received and also when these are sent to the responsible institution. This is another important point of our app, since we consider it essential that users receive feedback so that they want to continue participating.

And finally, we would like to mention that the user must register only to support or create initiatives, never before if they do not want to, and will do so for free.

Testing

To validate the proposed solution, we tested the prototype with 8 users.
The sessions with the users were carried out remotely, since sometimes, it was the only possible alternative, and in situ. Anyway, we did not find any inconvenience given the high degree of interactivity of the prototype, which provided sufficient autonomy to the user.
In this way, it was possible to quickly detect possible usability problems.

Positive feedback

• The app provides a solution to a need shared by users. It seems to everyone an interesting and necessary topic.
• It is intuitive and easy to use. The operation of it is quite well understood.
• The language used is close and intelligible.
• The colors used and the use of them are liked by users because they facilitate the understanding of the app.
• It is positive that the user receives notifications to be informed.
• That registration is not mandatory at the beginning is considered a plus.

Things to improve or change

• Modal display: It is invasive, it occupies the entire screen and can be a hindrance if the user wants to review the app for the first time.
• Copy: the word complaint could be replaced by terms such as “Proposal” or “Opportunity for improvement”, which is more collaborative.
• Home: review the copy of the home page to make it more intuitive and create a shortcut so that people can consult or create initiatives.
• Tab bar: check icon for queries and give it visibility.
• Hamburger menu: not very useful; could be removed.

Conclusions

Possibly the most exciting thing about the project was knowing that something similar already exists but, still, wanting to make a difference and make people’s life easier. A digital solution that brings citizens the opportunity to improve their environment just with a few clicks.

As next steps, we are thinking of continuing to design the screens that are not yet ready and perhaps present it to a city council or a startup incubator.

I have no words to describe the personal and professional satisfaction that this case study has entailed. From the moment we bet on this idea until today. I would like to thank my teammates for having carried out this work and to UXER School for giving us the tools to do it and supporting us throughout the process.

Thanks for reading! 🙃