A user experience designer, service designer and design researcher based in South Holland, who aims to creates meaningful interactions between people and emerging technology.

- Redesign IKEA Comfort Guide
- Mapping Beneficent AI

- Pavel, design a travel
- Pavel to DMZ
- How to measure 2 Meter 
- Donggwoldo, poster design

-- 2019 
- Hydro Scotland
- O2 ABC Glasgow  
- Closed Circuit

EDUCATION 2021-Present
  Delft University of Technology
  MSc Design for Interaction

  Glasgow School of Art, Scotland
  M.Des Design Innovation & Service Design

  Kookmin University, South Korea
  BA Spatial Design

Redesign IKEA Comfort Guide, 2021

For this project, I was assigned a team relative to the course: Project Usability & User experience Assessment in Design.

Within the team I have evaluated and redesigned IKEA’s comfort guide,
a tool to help customers in picking out mattresses, pillows and duvets.

︎︎︎Video :
︎︎︎Figma :
︎︎︎Report Phase 1 
︎︎︎Report Phase 2

# Design Research
# UX/UI Design
# Master’s Project
# Design for Interaction, TU Delft

Phase 1 - Product Evaluation

Phase 1 - Design Brief

Phase 2 - Redesign and Iterataions

Phase 2 - Recommendations

Phase 1 - Product Evaluation

‘IKEA Comfort Guide’

The project started with an extensive product evaluation.
We were introduced to the comfort guide and bed configurator through a conversation with our contact person at IKEA.
The conversation also gave insight into the products’ goal and whether the designers thought they reached it.

“Our mission is to support and empower customers to find
their personal best home and business furnishing solutions.”

In the cognitive walkthrough, our team went through the two tools ourselves
to get a feel for the products and document our initial experience of using the tools.
A product buildup was made to document all the tools’ functions.
Personas and context of use were set up to help create a realistic storyline of how the tools would be used.

Based on all research activities, a user evaluation test was set up and executed to evaluate the tools’ usability,
experience, and actual helpfulness in the customer’s decision-making process when buying a mattress.

Phase 1 - Design Brief

The project’s scope was narrowed down to only include the Comfort guide which led to the most problems.
Our research activities have pointed us towards one major underlying issue that limits the ability to reach Ikea’s mission:
“A lack of trust in the product’s ability to make decisions for the user.”

These problems stem from several subproblems.
“There is a lot of information on screen, but that information does not help to make informed decisions.” - Participant 3
“I don’t know how the preferences that I filled in influenced my choice. I had the feeling that the recommendations were random.” - Participant 4

A design goal and interaction vision were set up to help define our vision for redesigning the product.
Lastly, a plan was set up to evaluate whether our redesign would reach our design goal.

Phase 2 - Redesign & Iterations

After defining the problems of the original comfort guide and creating a vision for our redesign, the comfort guide was redesigned.
This phase started by brainstorming on what should be in the redesign. Several small user tests were conducted to evaluate our design decisions.
The following aspects of our redesign is integrated in the Figma prototype as these are the aspects that need to be validated:

1. Q&A chatbot
a. Layout
b. Order of questions
c. Answer options
d. Illustrations
e. Recommendations
f. Saving results

2. Results / recommendations
a. Product quality tags
b. Interactive GIFs
c. Saving options (shopping cart/ lists)
d. Recommended filters
e. Reviews
3. Offline IKEA
a. Using the code while visiting IKEA
     to retrieve results
b. Using the tags while visiting IKEA
c. Getting in contact with IKEA employees

To evaluate our redesign of the comfort guide and see if our design goal is met, final user tests with 6 participants were executed.

The facilitator of the test gave the participant the interactive figma prototype we made, together with a created use case with predefined sleeping needs and desires.
The participant was asked to perform certain tasks within the prototype by using this use case, while talking out loud what they were doing.
After use, the participant was asked to rate statements about the experience, usability, helpfulness and trustworthiness of the redesign.
Final questions were asked about whether and how the participant would use the product.   

The results of the user test were compared to those of the original comfort guide to evaluate whether the redesign improved the user experience.
Lastly, the results were used to see which elements of the redesign could be improved further.


Based on the scores and participant statements of the evaluation of the previous chapter,
the following recommendations are made to improve the redesign.