HCI / User-Centered Design Case Study
This portfolio-safe case study summarizes selected IST 331 Foundations of User-Centered Design work focused on interface evaluation, user profiles, user research, workflow analysis, low-fidelity prototyping, high-fidelity prototyping, usability testing, Figma collaboration, and iterative redesign of a travel-booking interface.
Overview#
IST 331 focused on foundations of user-centered design. The course emphasized how interfaces should be evaluated, researched, prototyped, tested, and improved based on user needs rather than designer assumptions.
The primary group project was a redesign of Booking.com. The project focused on reducing clutter, improving navigation, making travel-planning paths easier to understand, improving filtering, making important actions easier to find, adding feedback for completed actions, and improving user confidence during booking-related tasks.
The course also included individual work on user-friendly interfaces, user profiles, digital native versus digital immigrant differences, collaboration tools, and a usability testing lab.
This page is intentionally written as a portfolio-safe summary. It does not publish raw participant names, private interview responses, complete academic submissions, full Figma files, or complete group project artifacts.
Why This Project Matters#
This project matters because my portfolio itself is built around HCI and security-first thinking.
Good security workflows are not only technically correct. They must also be usable.
Poor usability can lead to:
- users clicking the wrong control
- users missing important warnings
- users abandoning workflows
- users making security mistakes
- reviewers failing to find important evidence
- analysts missing next steps
- teams building processes that are hard to follow
IST 331 helped strengthen my understanding of how user needs, interface structure, workflow clarity, feedback, error prevention, and iterative testing affect whether a system actually works for people.
That is directly relevant to cybersecurity, ServiceNow SecOps, vulnerability response, GRC workflows, incident response workflows, and this portfolio website.
Portfolio-Safe Publishing Approach#
Privacy note: This page summarizes user research and usability testing work without publishing raw participant names, private responses, complete interview notes, full academic submissions, or private prototype links.
This page excludes:
- raw participant names
- private interview responses
- full survey/interview data
- private Figma project links
- complete group submissions
- private student identifiers
- complete academic answers
- raw usability test notes
- full presentation files
Instead, it presents:
- design goals
- research approach
- usability themes
- testing summary
- design changes
- HCI lessons learned
- portfolio-safe outcomes
Major Workstreams#
Interface Evaluation#
Evaluated user-friendly and difficult interfaces, including how clutter, unclear navigation, hidden features, and lack of feedback affect usability.
Interface Review
User Profiles#
Compared different user backgrounds and technology experience levels to understand how prior experience affects expectations, comfort, and risk awareness.
User Profiles
Project Proposal#
Defined the Booking.com redesign problem, expected users, interface issues, business impact, and improvement goals.
Proposal
User Research#
Focused on business professionals and college students as target user groups, then collected feedback about travel-booking expectations and interface pain points.
UX Research
Low-Fidelity Prototype#
Created early prototype concepts to explore layout, navigation, booking flow, information organization, and screen structure before final visual polish.
Low-Fi Prototype
High-Fidelity Prototype#
Developed a higher-fidelity Figma prototype for the redesigned booking experience, including improved navigation and more complete user flows.
High-Fi Prototype
Usability Testing#
Tested prototype tasks with users, collected timing/click data, captured success outcomes, and used the results to guide revisions.
Usability Testing
Iterative Redesign#
Modified the high-fidelity prototype based on design principles, usability findings, and feedback.
Iteration
Booking.com Redesign Problem#
The group selected Booking.com because the interface presented several usability concerns.
Identified issues included:
- too much visual clutter
- overloaded information on the homepage
- weak focus around destination selection
- recommended destinations that did not feel clearly ordered
- filter controls that needed redesign
- hidden or difficult-to-find features
- profile-menu ambiguity
- unclear path back from sign-in/sign-up flows
- uncertainty after completing certain account actions
- flight search information overload
- travel-planning flows that could feel less streamlined than expected
The main design goal was to help users find relevant travel options more easily while reducing unnecessary clutter and improving clarity.
User Research#
The group focused on two user groups:
- business professionals
- college students
These groups were selected because they were accessible to the team and represented users who might use travel-booking websites for different reasons.
The user research considered:
- comfort with laptops, desktops, and mobile devices
- travel-booking expectations
- business versus personal travel needs
- information overload
- filtering needs
- ease of navigation
- booking confidence
- interface clarity
- user frustration points
The goal was to understand what users needed before deciding what to redesign.
Design and Testing Workflow#
Identify Interface Issues#
Reviewed Booking.com and identified clutter, hidden features, confusing navigation, weak feedback, and filter/search issues.
Interface Review
Define Users and Goals#
Defined target user groups, expected user needs, and redesign goals around clarity, navigation, filtering, and reduced cognitive load.
User Research
Create Low-Fidelity Prototype#
Produced early design concepts to test structure, layout, and flow before focusing on polished visuals.
Low-Fi Prototype
Build High-Fidelity Prototype#
Created a more complete Figma prototype with redesigned screens and improved user flows.
High-Fi Prototype
Run Usability Testing#
Asked users to complete tasks, collected task success, elapsed time, click counts, and subjective design ratings.
Usability Testing
Apply Design Revisions#
Modified the prototype using usability results and design principles such as feedback, consistency, error prevention, help, and universal usability.
Iteration
Usability Testing Evidence#
The individual usability testing lab collected task data from five participants using different devices.
Portfolio-safe summary of the test data:
This test helped connect usability to measurable outcomes rather than relying only on opinion.
Prototype Modification Evidence#
The high-fidelity prototype modifications were tied to established usability principles.
Collaboration and Tooling#
The group used multiple collaboration tools during the course.
The available evidence supports:
- Canvas messaging for initial communication
- Microsoft Teams for group communication and coordination
- document sharing and meeting planning
- Figma for prototype collaboration
- shared deliverables across proposal, research, prototype, usability testing, and final presentation
This matters professionally because user-centered design is collaborative. The quality of a design project depends not only on individual ideas, but also on coordination, communication, versioning, and shared understanding.
HCI Concepts Demonstrated#
Cognitive Load Reduction#
The redesign focused on reducing clutter, simplifying decision paths, and making travel-planning actions easier to identify.
Cognitive Load
Feedback and Closure#
Confirmation behavior helped users understand when login or account creation actions were completed.
Feedback
Error Prevention#
Calendar overlays reduced the chance of invalid date input and made date selection more familiar to users.
Error Prevention
Workflow Clarity#
The redesign attempted to make reservations, bookings, search, filters, and navigation easier to find and follow.
Workflow
User Research#
The project used target user groups and interviews to support design decisions rather than relying only on assumptions.
Research
Usability Testing#
The work included task testing, time-on-task, click counts, success outcomes, and design rating analysis.
Testing
Capability-to-Evidence Map#
Cybersecurity and ServiceNow Relevance#
This course supports cybersecurity and ServiceNow work because security tools and workflows need to be usable.
In cybersecurity environments, usability affects:
- whether analysts notice the right evidence
- whether users follow security procedures
- whether workflows are adopted consistently
- whether alerts, dashboards, and forms guide people correctly
- whether risky actions are prevented before they occur
- whether users understand confirmation, errors, and next steps
- whether a system supports both novice and experienced users
For ServiceNow SecOps specifically, HCI concepts matter because Vulnerability Response and Security Incident Response workflows depend on forms, records, queues, assignments, dashboards, status transitions, and user actions.
A technically correct workflow can still fail if users do not understand what to do next.
Connection to This Portfolio Website#
IST 331 directly supports the design philosophy behind this portfolio.
Many improvements to this site are based on HCI principles:
- clearer Start Here path
- role-based review paths
- stronger distinction between clickable buttons and static labels
- mobile usability improvements
- card-based navigation
- guided review workflow
- consistent course-coded project naming
- privacy-aware publishing approach
- reduced ambiguity around next steps
This course gives academic support to the same usability thinking applied throughout sudoRunner.
What I Learned#
This course reinforced several lessons:
- users should not have to guess where to go next
- clutter increases cognitive load
- hidden features reduce efficiency
- confirmation messages help users feel confident
- error prevention is better than error correction
- usability testing should measure behavior, not just opinions
- low-fidelity prototypes are useful before investing in visual polish
- high-fidelity prototypes should still be tested and revised
- different user groups may have different expectations
- collaboration tools matter in design projects
- HCI principles apply to cybersecurity workflows, not only consumer apps
Professional Relevance#
This project supports roles and tasks involving:
- ServiceNow SecOps consulting
- cybersecurity workflow design
- user-centered security process design
- analyst dashboard usability
- vulnerability management workflow design
- security operations process improvement
- requirements gathering
- stakeholder communication
- prototyping
- usability testing
- HCI-aware portfolio design
It is especially relevant to ServiceNow work because ServiceNow implementations must be usable by analysts, managers, assignment groups, and business stakeholders.
Difference from IST 402 Workflow Modeling#
IST 331 and IST 402 both relate to workflow design, but they show different strengths.
Together, they support both user-centered design and technical workflow modeling.
Portfolio-Safe Redaction Notes#
This case study intentionally excludes:
- raw participant names
- private interview responses
- complete test notes
- complete survey data
- full group submissions
- private Figma links
- complete prototype files
- private academic records
- complete presentation files
The goal is to show HCI process, usability evidence, and design reasoning without exposing raw academic or participant data.
Related Portfolio Areas#
HCI and Usability#
This work supports user-centered design, usability testing, workflow clarity, user feedback, error prevention, and iterative redesign.
HCI
ServiceNow SecOps#
SecOps workflows need clear forms, queues, dashboards, status transitions, assignment paths, validation steps, and next-action guidance.
SecOps-Relevant
Portfolio Design#
The course supports the design decisions used throughout sudoRunner, including guided review paths, mobile polish, and clearer clickable versus static elements.
Portfolio-Relevant
Security Process Design#
Security programs fail when workflows are confusing. HCI helps make security processes more usable, repeatable, and adoption-friendly.
Security Workflow
Next Steps#
This project can later be connected to:
- the HCI capability section
- the sudoRunner Portfolio Website project
- ServiceNow workflow usability notes
- a security dashboard usability concept
- a vulnerability response workflow HCI checklist
- a role-based reviewer journey note
- a mobile usability audit section
For now, this page serves as the main portfolio-safe summary of my IST 331 Foundations of User-Centered Design work.