LIDAR Viewer
NOTE: The exact details of this work are confidential and therefore I have limited the description to high level details and the methods I used
App to Visualize & Pre-Process Point Clouds
UX Research
What I did...
Duration
Enhancing existing workflow for an application
Usability Testing,
Workflow Mapping,
Feature Prioritisation
About
Team
TLDR: I worked on carrying out the core UX Research to enhance the current workflow of an application and reduce the usability bugs by 65%
Here's the summary of the high-level research and design processes we employed for the application
Point Clouds are 3D representation of an object in space
Imagine trying to recreate a 3D object, like a car or a tree, on a computer. A point cloud is like a digital version of a connect-the-dots puzzle. It’s a collection of tiny dots (points) that represent the surface of an object in 3D space.
However, before point clouds can be used to "see" the world, they need to be cleaned, edited, or optimized and that's where LIDAR Viewer App comes in.
Ramp Up - Context and Problem Statement
Tech support data indicated friction in app usage
I noticed recurring feedback from our customers pointing to significant friction in the edit, preprocess, and export stages of their workflow when using the LIDAR Viewer App. This feedback was further validated by telemetry data, which revealed a noticeable gap in user activity during these stages.
While the data highlighted where users were facing challenges, it didn’t provide enough context to understand why. To bridge this gap, I initiated a usability study as a first step to dive deeper into the user experience, uncover the root causes of these issues, and identify opportunities to enhance their workflow.
Ramp Up - Understanding the User
Edit and Export workflow are critical steps in user journey
Before planning the study, it was essential to first understand who the actual users of our application were and how they interacted with it.
To achieve this, I conducted desk research to map out users' roles, goals, and workflows. Internal data mining revealed two primary user groups for the LiDAR Viewer App:
-
Computer Vision Researchers: Focused on analyzing point cloud data to build algorithms and models.
-
Visualization Engineers: Specialized in rendering and interpreting 3D data for various applications.
Despite their differing roles, a key insight emerged: both user groups relied heavily on the editing, preprocessing, and exporting stages of the workflow. Interestingly, these were the same stages identified as having the highest dropout rates in our telemetry and customer feedback data.
.jpg)
.jpg)
Usability Testing - Hypothesis and Task Writing
Heuristic Analysis helped in drafting hypothesis and writing tasks
To further understand the problems that our users faced while using the LIDAR Viewer app, I planned on performing a usability study.
However, to get a deeper understanding of how our users might use the app - I performed a heuristic analysis which also led towards me writing the hypothesis and tasks which I asked the participants to perform. To make the test cover a wider ground and reduce the need for further studies, I also added certain tasks around the import workflow.
.jpg)
These are just some sample hypotheses. and tasks. The complete list has been omitted to maintain confidentiality
Usability Testing - Participant Recruitment
Participants were recruited across three regions
Screener questions were sent out to participants who were recruited through LinkedIn/Community Forums/UX sign-ups.
To ensure a balanced participant pool, I shortlisted a mix of newcomers and expert users. Desk research revealed regional variations in customer use cases, so I intentionally included individuals from diverse demographics to capture a wide range of perspectives.
8
Participants
5-3
3
New-Casual
Users
Regions
Usability Testing - Conducting the Study
Remote Moderated Sessions were conducted to gain user insights
Given the project's need to recruit participants from different regions globally, conducting remote usability sessions was essential.
Microsoft Teams was selected due to organizational constraints. To avoid potential screen-sharing issues with MATLAB, a computationally intensive software, I ran it on my system while sharing my screen, allowing participants to take control as needed. This ensured a smooth and uninterrupted session experience.
.jpg)
Participants were encouraged to talk out loud while I took notes during the sessions.
Additionally, I used internal tools to track task completion times and record the number of assists or documentation references required.
After each task, participants completed a post-task survey capturing their confidence, ease of use, and frustration levels.
Usability Testing - Analyzing the Results
7/8 participants required assists in completing edit operations
User quotes and observed behaviors were instrumental in identifying key pain points and usability challenges. By analyzing their verbal feedback, hesitation patterns, and task completion struggles, I gained deeper insights into areas where the LIDAR Viewer app caused friction.
Recurring themes from user quotes highlighted common frustrations, while behavioral cues—such as repeated reliance on documentation or frequent pauses—helped pinpoint areas of confusion. These insights informed actionable recommendations to enhance the app’s usability, streamline workflows, and improve the overall user experience.
Power BI was used as a tool to compare the quantitative readings from all participants.
Finally, I mapped out the intended user journey from the user profiles on Miro and mapped it with pain points that I learned from the usability study.
These are only some of the steps and the pain points. The complete list has been omitted to maintain confidentiality
Designing the Solution - Ideation Workshop
Two day workshop was conducted to ideate solutions and get stakeholder buy-in
After bucketing the pain points and mapping the user journey, I, along with my designer engaged the cross-functional team to participate in design discussions.
An ideation session with the cross functional team involving Doc and QE adding to the core Dev and UX
A report out of the major findings from the usability testing and a live demo was given to the participants to explain the context of the pain-points
The requirements were consolidated from users’ perspective based on the pain-points laid down earlier
As a group, we came up with a 2x2 matrix that was used to prioritize the jobs to be done
Finally, everyone in the room came up with low-fidelity pen and paper designs which were later formalized by designing in Figma. The participants worked individually on solutions and the group brainstormed on the pros and cons of individual ideas
These are just some sample and concept designs. The complete set of screens have been omitted for confidentiality
Designing the Solution - High Fidelity Sketches
Assisted the designer towards a data-driven redesign
After collaboratively brainstorming ideas through pen-and-paper sketches, I worked closely with the UX Designer to refine the solutions. Leveraging insights from my research, I played an active role in guiding design decisions, ensuring they addressed key user pain points.
This involved discussing user feedback, prioritizing usability improvements, and validating design iterations against our research findings. By acting as a bridge between research and design, I helped align our solutions with user needs, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness and intuitiveness of the LIDAR Viewer app.
These are just some sample and concept designs. The complete set of screens have been omitted for confidentiality
Validating the Solution - Stakeholder Design Review
Stakeholders appreciated the design changes
Once the Figma prototype of the new design was completed, it was crucial to have it reviewed and validated by key stakeholders to secure their buy-in and ensure alignment before moving forward.
To facilitate this, the UX Designer and I organized and hosted a review meeting, where we presented the design updates, walked stakeholders through the rationale behind our decisions, and gathered feedback. This collaborative discussion helped refine the prototype further and ensured that the final design met both user needs and business objectives.
1st level review: Development Team
To ensure that the designed solution is technically viable
2nd level review: Global UX
To ensure that the designed sketches meet the organization's design standards
Feedback Received (Highlights)
•"Great to see that you did usability testing and were able to make updates based on user's pain points"
•"Nice investigation, analysis, and proposed design changes"
•"I like the contextual move up/down buttons within each operation."
•"VISUALIZE section seems cluttered as of now. Maybe dropdowns for first two rows would work."
Validating the Solution - Usability Study - Round 2
Second usability study validated design changes and indicated an increase in NPS
After incorporating stakeholder feedback, I conducted another usability study to validate whether our design improvements effectively addressed the identified usability issues.
For this study, I recruited a new set of participants while maintaining the same demographic distribution to ensure consistency in insights. While the team discovered some new bugs, the majority of previously identified usability issues were resolved. As a result, we achieved a significant 65% reduction in overall usability bugs, confirming the effectiveness of our design iterations.
5
Participants
3-2
3
New-Casual
Users
Regions
