Dylan Golcher
Data Analyst
I am a data analyst with an educational background in UX/User Research and Marketing Communications. I have previous experience in customer facing and specialized administrative roles. Presently and in these past roles, I have used various tools and methods to accomplish task-oriented goals using data, stemming from inventory management and scheduling to summarizing large datasets and deriving variables for statistical analysis. As a detail-oriented problem solver by heart with a knack for effective communication and propensity towards inquisitive thinking, I strive to investigate and uncover the profound stories data has to tell.
Hungry Ducks
The purpose of this project was to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the Hungry Ducks website to better understand its level of usability
Note: Study was done strictly in an educational capacity and not for commercial purposes.
Overview
-
Hungry Ducks, a Eugene, Oregon based food ordering service, allows its users to browse the menus of a wide variety of local restaurants and place orders for pickup or delivery, all without having to leave the site
-
Despite its popularity amongst the local student population, Hungry Ducks faces stiff competition from major national competitors, namely GrubHub and Eat24
Process
-
An overarching research question was first developed to guide the project:
"What are the strengths and weakneses of the Hungry Ducks website as they pertain to usability?
-
To help answer this question, two primary research methods were utilized:
1. User Interviews
2. Usability Testing
-
To assure the data that was collected was representative of the most typical Hungry Ducks user, the study focused on the following target profiles:
-
A screener was used to find suitable individuals for the study:
-
Once the proper individuals were recruited, they were interviewed and asked to perform a usability test of the Hungry Ducks website. Here's what was found:
User Interview Findings (qualitative)
Usability Testing (quantitative)
-
Based on the feedback from both research methods, three key recommendations were made:
