Visual Storytelling: a design method to capture
and validate experience in the early stages of the
design process
By
Sara Salevati
B.Sc./Interaction Design
Simon Fraser University (SIAT), 2008

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF APPLIED ART
in
Design

EMILY CARR UNIVERSITY OF ART + DESIGN

2010

© Sara Salevati, 2010

Abstract
The early stages of the design process are often ambiguous and
complex. In this phase designers discover, learn and gather
much information about the audience, culture and the context
they are designing for. Through the synthesis of data their goal
is to learn as much as possible about all stakeholder
perspectives, activities and constraints involved in the design
situation in order to identify and prioritize design problems.
This paper examines the value of visual storytelling
methods in the early stages of the design process to enhance
the identification of design opportunities, validate assumptions
and improve design decision-making when designing for an
optimal user experience. To help evaluate the potential benefits
of visual storytelling methods a case study has been conducted
with fourth year Interaction Design students at Emily Carr
University involved in designing a patient tracking system using
radio frequency identification technology for the BC Children’s
Hospital Emergency Department.
This research explores storytelling as a visualization tool for
translating, interpreting, verifying and communicating data
collected from diverse user communities to build a better
understanding of the context and circumstances surrounding
complex design challenges involving multiple stakeholders.

ii

Table of Contents
Abstract

ii

Table of Contents

iii

List of Figures

iv

Acknowledgements

v

Dedications

vi

Introduction
Inspiration
Overview
Research Questions

2
3
7

Design Review
Human Centered Design
Co-creation
Interaction Design
Design Thinking
Service Design
Summary

9
10
11
14
15
17

Visualization Techniques
Sketching and Drawing
Data Visualization
Persona
Sketching User Experience
Summary

21
22
24
25
27

Storytelling
Scenarios
Storyboarding as Narrative
Storytelling to capture experience
Summary

30
31
33
35

Case Study
BC Children’s Hospital Study
Feedback from Study Participants
Summary

37
40
48

The Visual Storytelling Method
The Need for New Methods
Opportunities to Leverage Visualization
Techniques
Opportunities to Leverage Storytelling
Results from Case Study

50
50
51
51

Conclusion
Concluding Comments
Future Directions

54
56

Bibliography
Bibliography

59

iii

List of Figures
Figure 1. Methods used in the fuzzy front-end of
the design process based on Sanders (2008)

4

Figure 2. Application of visual tools and storytelling in
the front-end of the design process to synthesize and
validate qualitative research based on Sanders (2008)

5

Figure 3. A representation of the design process
based on Jones (1992)

12

Figure 4. A representation of the design process
based on Sanders (2008)

12

Figure 5. A representation of the design thinking
model based on Brown (2008)

18

Figure 6. Storytelling Workshop 1 (ECUAD 2009)

37

Figure 7. Marked-up storyboards during Workshop 1
(ECUAD 2009)

38

Figure 8. Storytelling Workshop 2

39

Figure 9. Marked-up storyboards during Workshop 1
(ECUAD 2009)

41

Figure 10. Storyboard 2: child’s perspective
(Stephanie Vacher, ECUAD 2009)

42

Figure 11. Storyboard 2: parent’s perspective
(Rachel Simpson, ECUAD 2009)

42

Figure 12. Storyboard 2: doctor’s perspective
(Stephanie McCarty, ECUAD 2009)

43

Figure 13. Storyboard 2: parent’s and child’s
perspective (Jacky Ling ECUAD 2009)

45

Figure 14. Storytelling Workshop 3 (ECUAD 2009)

47

iv

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor
Jim Budd for expanding my views on Design, for his
mentorship, unwavering support and encouragement in the
realization of this thesis. Thank you to Deborah Shackleton for
guiding and inspiring me in this process with her passion and
immense knowledge in Design. Thank you to the INDD 316/416
class for their participation in my research. Also a special thank
you to my external examiner Dr. Krystina Madej for her valuable
feedback and close reading of this thesis.

v

Dedications
To my best friend, my mom

vi

Introduction

1

Inspiration
My background in Interaction Design has provided me with the
opportunity to explore people’s interaction and experiences with
products, services and environments that inhabit our world. My
design practices have always evolved through a process of
discovery grounded in research, beginning in qualitative
observations and have taught me to look beyond the surface of
human behavior to find deeper clues to help foster the creation
of more meaningful experiences. My process involves a CoCreation methodology, which includes active participation and
collaboration with end-users.
Two years ago, I began my graduate education in Interaction
Design research. I immediately became involved in a research
initiative undertaken in conjunction with the BC Children’s
Hospital and Emily Carr University Design faculty to identify and
document priority areas within the hospital that could potentially
benefit from a design intervention.
During the completion of the formal requirements analysis
supported by an in-depth precedent study in collaboration with
other designers, I became aware of some of the challenges we
encountered. As designers with little or no experience in
healthcare we were overwhelmed with the scope of the project
and the amount of information we had to research, discover and
learn. We had to consider the many different points of view of
everyone involved in healthcare and understand their
experiences, ie: patients, parents, nurses, doctors. We also had
to identify and prioritize potential design opportunities and
document and communicate our decision-making process to all
stakeholders involved in the project.
Shortly after, I became very interested in the ambiguous
early stages of the design process where designers learn about
their users, the physical context and explore and discover
opportunities for a design intervention to improve or enhance
the current situation.
I began to reflect on my past design practices and carefully
examine my own design process. The value of narrative and
human experience was evident as the commonality in my

2

process.
I investigated how my projects were shaped and
progressed within each iteration of the design process by
comparing the initial ideas with the end product. During this
process, I noticed that the documentation of my projects did not
always communicate the synthesis of the data collected in the
front-end of the design process as clearly as I might have liked.
As a result it often required further discussion to justify and
validate my design decisions and showcase the development of
my design thinking throughout the design process.
These explorations inspired me and led me to questions
how designers validate their discoveries and findings in the early
stages of the design process and how this information gets
synthesized and filtered in leading them to identify the right
design problems. Further, I wondered how designers
communicate this decision-making process to fellow designers,
users and other stakeholders involved.
I began to research the role of narrative and visualization
techniques used in different stages of the design process and
became particularly interested in their application within the
uncertain front-end of the design process as tools to translate
designers’ research data through the experience and point of
view of the users. Through this paper I hope to encourage other
designers to utilize their visualization and storytelling skills in the
early stages of design process to not only share and
communicate their mental models and design decisions, but
also to validate their synthesis of gathered data.

Overview
Experiences are multifaceted. It is important for designers to
consider the different perspectives and learn about everyone’s
roles, expectations and relationships in the early stage of their
design process. The front-end of design process is fuzzy, thus
designers utilize different methodologies to discover and gather
as much information as they can about the design context and
the people they are designing for. This upfront research helps
steer the design in the right direction by enabling designers to

3

better assess the design situation and to define and prioritize the
right design problems.
It is difficult for designers to explain and communicate their
decision-making throughout the design process particularly in
the ambiguous front-end. They can describe the various
methods they used in the early stages of the design process
such as observations, interviews, probes and workshops,
however, it is often unclear how the information and insight
gathered through these approaches gets filtered through to the
next stages of the process and leads designers to positive
outcomes (see Figure 1). My research concentrates on the frontend of the design process, primarily on how designers
synthesize and communicate research data to frame problems
and identify design opportunities.

fuzzy

focus

observations
field study
ethnography
interviews
probes
workshops

research

concepts

prototype

Figure 1. Methods used in the fuzzy front-end of the design process based on Sanders (2008)

Designers take different approaches to design and see
design situations differently. It is important for them to be able
to share their design process, thinking and knowledge through a
dialogue understood and accessed by all. Designers are visual
thinkers and communicators and should utilize their visualization
skills throughout the design process, particularly in the front-end
to synthesize and communicate their gathered data in order to
enhance the identification and validation of the right design
problems. Visual stories act as a common language for
designers in communicating their mental model and
understanding of a design situation and decision-making to all
perspectives involved in designing for experiences. My research

4

has generated evidence that the application of visual stories
helps clarify the front-end of design process by acting as a
validation tool. Designers produce these stories by translating
and interpreting their gathered raw data and walking in their
user’s shoes by visualizing and narrating their experiences (see
Figure 2). These stories invite everyone involved in the design
(ie, other designers, users and stakeholders) to confirm
designer’s understanding of the design situation and also to pin
point their gaps in knowledge.

visualizations

focus

patterns

insights

storytelling

synthesis

concepts

prototype

Figure 2. Application of visual tools and storytelling in the fuzzy front-end of the design
process to synthesize and validate qualitative research based on Sanders (2008)

This thesis focuses on the application of the visual
storytelling methods in the Interaction Design process and how
those methods can effectively complement other front-end
methods to support designers’ research, vision and
understanding when designing for experiences involving
multiple stakeholders.
The content of this document is organized through the
following sections.
The Introduction section describes my background and my
primary focus in this particular research area. It is a general
guide for the structure of this thesis and examines my research
objectives and questions.
The Design Review section provides an overview of design
literature and theory significant to my research. It examines the

5

evolution of different design disciplines that influenced the shift
in designers’ focus from object centered to experience centered
design. This section closely looks at the evolution of Human
Centered Design, Interaction Design, Co-creation, Design
Thinking and Service Design.
The Visualization Techniques section describes the different
visualization techniques used throughout the design process to
support designers’ vision and understanding of the design
context and the people they are designing for. This section
focuses on Sketching and Drawing, Data Visualization, Persona
and Sketching User Experience.
The Storytelling section outlines the role of narrative in
design and its significance in capturing user experiences. It
closely examines Scenarios, Storyboarding as Narrative and
Storytelling to Capture Experiences.
The BCCH Case Study section presents the investigations
of the visual storytelling method in the front-end of design
process through a case study conducted with a fourth year
Interaction Design class involved in the design of a radio
frequency identification system in the Emergency Department
of the BC Children’s Hospital.
The Visual Storytelling Method section identifies the
opportunities to leverage visualization and storytelling
techniques to help clarify designers’ vision and understandings
at the front-end of the design process. It also reveals the values
of the visual storytelling methods that have resulted from the
field-testing.
The Conclusion summarizes key findings from the study
identifying the effectiveness of visual storytelling when
designing for experiences and promoting its application in the
early stages of design process. It also discusses the future
directions for this thesis.

6

Research Questions
This research is intended primarily for designers designing for
experiences involving multiple stakeholders, as it examines the
value of the visual storytelling methods used in early stages of
the design process. These methods help designers to visualize
and synthesize research data, frame design problems, optimize
design decision-making, understand the complexity of service
experience as well as facilitate communication and collaboration
amongst team members and stakeholders involved in the design
project.
This research specifically aims to address the following
questions:
How can the visual storytelling methods used in early phases of
the design process help designers validate their research data by
presenting the research data in a way that can be quickly and
clearly communicated to all stakeholders involved in designing
experiences?
How can the visual storytelling methods used in early phases of
the design process help designers to understand the complex
scope of design problems, identify design opportunities and
optimize design decision-making?
How can visual storytelling methods help designers to visualize,
express and choreograph better experiences that include
multiple perspectives?

7

Design Review

8

Human Centered Design
The evolution of Human Centered Design has shifted designers’
perspective from looking at objects and focusing primarily on
form to looking at people and focusing on human experiences.
Over the past two decades designers no longer try to design
only for aesthetic and usability values, but to design for an
overall experience. This emergence has resulted in a change in
the role of the designer from that of a master to that of a
facilitator.
The Human Centered Design theory stems from the field of
User-Centered Design (UCD) rooted in the mid-eighties. UCD
was instrumental in the establishment of the field of Human
Computer Interaction (HCI), which focuses on the development
of technology. In the book Design of Everyday Things, Donald
Norman uses the term ‘User-Centered Design’ to describe
design that primarily focuses on end-users’ needs and wants
and their involvement in the design process. Norman makes
recommendations to place the user at the center of the design
by “facilitating tasks for the user and making sure that the user
is able to make use of the product as intended and with a
minimum effort to learn how to use it” (Norman, 1988). UCD
has since evolved to a broader perspective - Human Centered
Design - that not only encompasses the active involvement of
end-users throughout the design process but also focuses
specifically on the human behavior, emotional responses and
experience.
Human-Centered Design has become a foundation of
research and practice in other design disciplines such as
Industrial and Interaction Design. This approach is iterative and
“begins with the person - […] her goals, what she does, what
she wants to achieve, [and] what she experiences”(Evenson,
2008).
Over the past few years designers no longer try to design
only for aesthetic and usability values, but to design for an
overall experience. Bill Buxton the author of Sketching User
Experiences argues that designers are experiencing a shift from
“object-centered to experience-centered design”(Buxton, 2007).

9

He explains, “It is not the physical entity or what is in the box
(the material product) that is the true outcome of design. Rather,
it is the behavioral, experiential, and emotional responses that
come about as a result of its existence and its use in the real
world” (Buxton, 2007). However, experience is a subjective
phenomenon. You cannot design experiences because each
experience is unique. User participation and collective creativity
are a much-needed assistance in designing for an experience, so
that the products, interfaces, spaces and services that are
designed will act as a platform to help ordinary people create
their own experience.
My research is based on the human-centered model in
enhancing the designer’s understanding of their users’
interactions and relationships with products and services in
order to design for better experiences.

Co-creation
The Human Centered Design revolution has made designers
rethink the design process and their relationship with the people
they are designing for. As designers “we are no longer simply
designing products for users. We are designing for the future
experiences of people, communities and cultures who now are
connected and informed in ways that were unimaginable even
10 years ago” (Sanders, 2006). This has resulted in the
emergence of Participatory Design or Co-Design culture, which
supports the involvement and collaboration of everyday people
in the design and development process. The role of
“consumers” in this space has changed into a role as “creators”
(Sanders, 2008).
Liz Sanders is a pioneer in the use of Participatory Design
and Co-creation research. She is a founder of MakeTools, a
company that has developed a series of generative tools for
collective creativity. She has created tools such as the Say,
Make, Do methodology that allows designers to access people’s
experiences and learn from their memories. She believes that
through the Say, Make, Do methodology “we can listen to what
people say, […] interpret what people express, […] watch what

10

people do and […] use, [and thus] uncover what people know
and […] reach toward understanding what people feel and […]
appreciate[ing] what [they] dream” (Sanders, 2002). By Say she
refers to methods such as contextual interviews, focus groups
and surveys. Do, refers to what researchers learn by observing
what people do, through a variety of ethnographic methods. The
Make portion of Sander’s method is about what people make,
through the workbook, the collaging, and the Velcro prototyping
(Sanders, 2002). In this new space, designers can access and
understand the needs and dreams of people and create
scaffolds that help people realize their dreams. Many leading
designers, design firms and design educators have adopted and
integrated variations of these methods into their everyday
practice.
Through my research I am exploring how the visual
storytelling method can add to these Co-creation method to
capture these ‘stories’ in the early stage of the design process.

Interaction Design
The Interaction Design discipline has matured in the 21st
century and focuses on the design of people’s interactions with
technology, products, services and environments. Interaction
Design has gained ground within Human Centered Design and
focuses on the involvement and participation of end-users
throughout the design process. Interaction Designers examine
and explore people’s behaviors and relationships through a set
of methodologies (such as observational studies, user research,
workshops, etc.) that support their vision and understanding of
their users in different stages of the design process. The
emergence of this field has provided designers with a set toolkit
that allows them to design for the behavioral, experiential, and
emotional responses.
Bill Moggridge in his book Designing Interactions focuses
on people’s adaptation with technology and discusses
Interaction Designers not being concerned about objects that
are beautiful, but designing people’s interactions with these
objects (Moggridge, 2007). Jon Kolko goes further in his book

11

Thoughts on Interaction Design saying that “Interaction Design
is the creation of dialogue between a person and a product,
system or service. This dialogue is both physical and emotional
in nature, and is manifested in form, function and technology”
(Kolko, 2007). According to Moggridge and Kolko Interaction
Designers shape human behavior with their designs. Because
“[h]uman behavior is innately poetic [and] natural,” the world of
Interaction Design focuses on the dialogue between people and
things, and brings humanity to the design of technology (Kolko,
2007).

analysis

synthesis

evaluation

Figure 3. A representation of the design process based on Jones (1992)

Interaction Design focuses heavily on process rather than
outcome. The traditional design model depicts the process as
linear involving three main parts: analysis, synthesis and
evaluation (see Figure 3). The analysis phase involves the
exploration of design situations and the identification of design
opportunities. During the synthesis phase the designer typically
moves toward generating design solutions. Finally, within the
evaluation phase the designer refines design solutions against
framed problems.

fuzzy

analysis

focus

synthesis

evaluation

Figure 4. A representation of the design process based on Sanders (2008)

12

However, the Interaction Design process is non-linear (see
Figure 4) as it contains feedback loops between the parts of the
process, as one part may affect the other. Interaction Design
toolkit is full of methodologies that support the non-linearity of
this process and the involvement of people throughout the
design development. Interaction designers are “concerned with
describing how people might interact with and experience the
products, services and environments that inhabit their world.”
Being able to “effectively tell a story, […] is an important part of
any Interaction Designer’s skill set, and proves useful at many
different points of the design process” (Fullerton, 2009).
“Löwgren and Stolterman (2004) describe the design
process through three levels of abstraction: the vision, operative
image, and specification.” They believe that “vision emerges
when the designer first confronts a design situation.” The initial
idea is internal, “often fuzzy [and] intuitive” but crucial in aiding
the designer to “understand the situation” they are working in
(Hegeman, 2008).
The fuzzy front end refers to the ambiguous early stage of
the design process. “Formerly called “pre-design”, the front end
describes the many activities that take place in order to inform
and inspire the exploration of open ended questions” (Sanders &
Stappers, 2008). Designers in this phase use different
methodologies to gather information about the people, culture
and the context they are designing for. “In the fuzzy front end, it
is often not known whether the deliverable of the design
process will be a product, a service, an interface, a building, etc.
Considerations of many issues and concerns come together in
this increasingly critical phase , e.g., understanding of users and
contexts of use, exploration and selection of technological
opportunities such as new materials and information
technologies, etc” (Sanders & Stappers, 2008). The exploration
in this phase enables designers to ideate and identify design
opportunities.
The front-end of the design process is uncertain and
complex. In this stage designers “discover or construct many
different variables” in order to frame and define the right design
problem (Schön, 1988). In identifying these problems designers

13

“set boundaries, select particular things […] and impose on the
situation a coherence that guides subsequent moves” (Schön,
1988).
My research lies within this fuzzy front-end of the design
process. I am exploring how visualization combined with
narrative can support the designers’ vision and understanding of
the design situation through the point of view of and stories of
their users.

Design Thinking
Tim Brown, the CEO and president of the world renown creative
firm IDEO, focuses on design thinking and the culture of
innovation. In Harvard Business Review he talks about design
and integrative thinking, which is balancing desirability: what
people need, what society needs and feasibility: what is
technologically possible, with viability: what makes business
sense, what is sustainable (Brown, 2008). According to Brown,
Design Thinking can be considered a design discipline that uses
a designer’s sensibility in designing products, services and
environments. He goes further by borrowing from Peter
Drucker, “design thinking converts need into demand” (Brown,
2008).
Design thinking is necessary in designing for experiences. It
allows the designer to imagine the multiple perspectives
involved- those of the design team, clients and users and take
into account the multiple demands – those of business,
technological and environmental sensibility. It also provides
designers with new and creative ways of approaching potential
problems, thinking blue-sky (outside of the box) ideas and
problem solving in new directions. According to David Kelly from
IDEO designers have started to become self-reflexive and
identify “[themselves] as design thinkers [who possess] a
methodology that enables [them] to come up with a solution
that nobody has before” (as qtd. in Tishler, 2009).
Design thinking is about embracing the ambiguity of design
and combining tacit knowledge, critical thinking and creativity in
the design process. It can be considered “a dialectic, or a

14

conversation [because it] involves design wisdom, judgment,
and knowledge” (Hegeman, 2008).
According to Schön, design thinking occurs in the design
world, the space and state of mind into which designers enter
while designing. In this space designers shape their design
knowledge over an understanding of the design situation
through what Seymour Papert calls “things to think with”
(Schön 1988). These are tools that allow designers to
understand, strategize and visualize a particular design situation
and conduct a dialogue with that situation (Schön 1988).
Although it is very natural for designers to enter a design
world and use design thinking and reasoning to realize design
opportunities and solutions, it is often difficult to share and
communicate this process with others involved in the project. It
is therefore necessary for designers to be able to exploit
different methods to explain their design decision-making
process prior to their arrival at the design solutions.
Design worlds are constructed “not only through the
shaping of materials but through interlocking processes of
perception, cognition and notation”(Schön 1988). My research
suggests that narrative and visual techniques can act as a
window to the design world by showcasing design thinking in a
way that is understood by everyone involved.

Service Design
Service design is an emerging discipline that has received much
attention in the past few years with the advent of the first
service design conference organized by Carnegie Mellon School
of Design in 2006. It is influenced heavily by Human Centered
design, Interaction Design process and methodologies and
Design Thinking. “Service design is a discipline that is influential
in innovation processes, in business and technology
development, as well as in deployment of technology” (Moritz,
2005). Services are experiences that become apparent “through
a variety of messages, products, performances, and processes
co- produced by client(s) and service personnel” (Evenson,
2008).

15

Service design is multifaceted; it encompasses multiple
perspectives - those of consumers, employees and stakeholders
- and addresses social, economical and technological needs
within a broader spectrum. Sangiorgi and Pacenti (2008) define
three main emerging practices for service design: service
interactions, co-creation within complex systems, and platforms
for participation (Sangiorgi and Pacenti, 2008).
Shelly Evenson of Carnegie Mellon describes service design
as bringing people together in conversations. “These are
conversations among the design community, among the
business community, conversations with the technologist and
with the people that are living and breathing the service”
(Evenson, 2008).
She says that designers need to see the big picture, the
overall context for designing service. Evenson mentions that
service experiences are multi faceted and co-produced. Every
time we engage in a service experience- the people who are
around us are having an impact on that service- everyone is
participating, from the customer to the employee. She goes
further, saying that when we are designing for service – we are
coproducing the coproducing – people who are participating in
the design of the service will be co-producing the service as
they deliver it; and the experience itself is co-produced.
She describes 6 types of conversations: understand, accept,
integrate, attend, explore and envision (Evenson, 2008). Service
design is non-linear as it is made up of several interactions
through a range of touch points over time and involves multiple
perspectives. To design for a service experience, designers
must have a clear understanding of everyone’s specific roles
involved in that service, from the customers to the employees.
The outcome of design here is not a product, but the overall
experience across all touch points, interactions of people with
products, spaces and other people.
Service design is in a state of flux, it is ongoing and never a
finished product that is being consumed. It is always changing
and shaping the behavior of its consumers. The complexity of
service design moves beyond the part experienced by
customers and employees, to its existence within a broader

16

world of an economic structure. “Service designers view their
design object as events and performances in interaction and cocreation between humans, supported by other means”
(Segelstrom and Holmlid, 2009).
Service designers “visualize, express and choreograph what
other people can’t see, envisage solutions that do not yet exist,
observe and interpret needs and behaviors and transform them
into possible service futures, and express and evaluate, in the
language of experiences, the quality of design”(Service Design
Network, 2005). When designing for a service experience,
designers need to utilize different methodologies to help them
clearly understand and communicate the multi-layered nature of
the service experience. “Visualization techniques can be claimed
to be one of the fundamentals of service design” (Segelstrom
and Holmlid, 2009).
In this thesis I am exploring how visualization and
storytelling methods can support the service conversations
described by Shelly Evenson and the intangible and complex
nature of service performance by capturing the interactions of
everyone involved with each other and with the service event.

Summary
The evolution of Human Centered Design, Interaction Design
and Co-creation methodologies have provided designers with
the options to not just design products for people but to design
experiences with people. This shift has brought to focus the
importance of design process and the involvement and
participation of users throughout.
Designers, through an iterative process, discover, learn, and
immerse themselves in the world of their users, to better
understand the different perspectives and factors of the design
challenge in the early stages of design process.
The front-end of the design process is uncertain and ambiguous.
In this stage designers “discover or construct many different
variables” in order to frame and define the right design problem
(Schön, 1988). In identifying these problems designers “set
boundaries, select particular things […] and impose on the

17

situation a coherence that guides subsequent moves” (Schön,
1988).
Through design thinking and problem solving designers
become aware of how their decisions and designs not only
affect one individual, but influence systems and society as a
whole. More and more designers are taking the responsibility to
slow down their design process and utilize various
methodologies to understand their users and the design context
before jumping into solutions.

integrative thinking
technology
multi-channel
experience
design

people

business

Figure 5. A representation of the design thinking model based on Brown (2008)

This integrative thinking (see Figure 5) has resulted in the
emergence of new practices such as service design, which
addresses business and social challenges. The scope of design
has become more complex - designers have moved from
designing products, to technology, experiences, environments
and more recently services. In this domain of intricacy,
designers need to adopt new methodologies in the front-end of
design process to validate their research and understanding of
their users to support the design of multi-channel experiences.
Design solutions within these complex contexts are not always
tangible; they could be systems of thinking or organizational
models. Therefore, it is necessary that designers spend time in
the early stage of their design process to learn and analyze the
design circumstances accurately and to eliminate any
assumptions and preconceived notions through validation of
their research data with their users.

18

This literature review highlights the progression in the scope
of design, its implications, and the need for the exploration of
more holistic approaches to leverage designers’ understanding
of these complex problems. Furthermore it identifies the need
for designers to validate their research and vision in the early
stages of the design process to support the plural perspective in
designing for multi-channel experiences.

19

Visualization Techniques

20

Sketching and Drawing
Designers are visual thinkers. Sketching and drawing are
fundamental skills for designers and enable them to express and
communicate their mental models of problem situations, ideas
for solutions and rational for decision-making in different stages
of their design process. Sketches and drawing support the
fluidity and non-linearity of creative process, through which
designers can discover and explore ideas and realize their
thinking. The non-permanent nature of sketches allows for
experimentation and play throughout the design process,
providing designers with an opportunity to fail and learn. Bill
Buxton in his book Sketching User Experiences describes
sketching in the Interaction Design process as “quick, timely,
inexpensive, disposable, plentiful, and ambiguous” (Buxton,
2007). Thus, sketches are not prototypes and should dominate
in the early ideation stage as they are cost effective and
disposable. Prototypes are more refined, take longer to build and
occur in the later stages of design process. Where “sketching is
about asking questions, prototyping is about suggesting
answers”(Buxton, 2007).
Buxton believes that ambiguity is one of the main attributes
of sketches: “If you want to get the most out of a sketch, you
need to leave big enough holes” (Buxton, 2007). Their
ambiguous nature supports the uncertain and fuzzy front-end of
design process as they suggest, propose, and question. In the
early stages of design process designers can use sketching and
drawings to discover, frame out early ideas and brainstorm.
Sketches support the flexibility of ideas in the uncertain frontend of the design process by enabling designers to easily
produce an extensive range of alternatives. Sketching and
drawing support the iterative nature of design. Sketching and
drawing can be used for different purposes in different phases
of the design process. They can be used as brainstorming tools,
such as ideating and conceptualization, usually in the front-end
of design process; as a testing tool such as prototyping, towards
the end of design process; and also as a communication tool
such as renderings at the very end of design process. Designers

21

can carry sketches through to different stages of their design
process and build upon them. More refined sketches and
drawings are used in the prototyping stage of design process.
Many Interaction Designers use drawings and paper prototyping
as preliminary user testing tools in designing interfaces and web
applications. Designers also use more refined sketching and
drawing in the final stages of their process as aides for
communication and formal presentation.
“Sketches are social things” (Buxton, 2007). Sketching is an
activity among designers and sketches facilitate collaboration
with all stakeholders involved in the design project as they invite
others to comment, suggest and criticize. Sketching and
drawing also acts as a dialogue for designers when
communicating their mental models and understanding of a
design situation to designers and non-designers involved in the
design project.
“Sketches are an essential designer’s tool for capturing
preliminary observations and ideas” (Verplank, 2003). Sketches
can act as a tool for designers to tune into their initial
understanding of a design situation, to problem solve and ideate
through visualization. Sketches in the early stage of a design
process can quickly represent the overall context and culture of
the design situation and make apparent all the constraints and
activities involved. Designers, through the act of sketching, can
express what they know, what they think and how they imagine.
My research focuses on the potential to utilize these
visualization skills in the front-end of design process to enable
designers to capture their understanding of a design situation, to
recognize the gaps in their knowledge and define and prioritize
the right design problems through the translation of their
research data.

Data Visualization
Is a picture really worth a thousand words? We understand and
make sense of our world mainly through our eyes. We learn,
remember, communicate and express ourselves through visual
language. There is extensive research that supports the effect of

22

understanding, synthesizing and remembering of visual data
versus text alone. According to New York University
psychologist Jerome Bruner “people only remember 10% of
what they hear and 20% of what they read, but about 80% of
what they see and do” (Lester, 2006).
We are surrounded by data visualization in our everyday life,
from images to charts to diagrams and graphs. “Graphs were
invented to bring meanings in quantitative data to light, which
could not be discerned from a table of numbers” (Few, 2006).
Visualization is an important tool for designers, not only to
translate and interpret their collection of raw data but also to
understand and synthesize that information visually.
Through a storyboard, the combination of visual
representation of a narrative with short descriptive text, the
designer is able to effectively communicate and see the
meaning of their gathered data. As the researcher and
academician Edward R. Tufte has observed, “to envision
information […] is to work at the intersection of image, word,
number, [and] art” (Tufte, 1990). Color, characters, setting and
other details of these stories serve this purpose by adding
another dimension to the effective communication and
visualization of data.
We not only better perceive and understand visual
language, but as designers we think visually. Visual tools such as
drawings, sketches, concept maps, models, etc, are crucial in
design thinking and process. Visual tools allow designers to
make sense of the world of their users. Through visual models
designers, understand interactions and relationships, problem
solve and predict. They are “especially important in interaction
and service design [because of their ability to] bridge the gap
between observing and making and as such between [the]
research […] and design communities” (Dubberly, 2008).
“Designers are usually unable to say what they know, to put
their special skills and understanding into words” (Schön, 1988).
As the description of the design process is often difficult for
designers to communicate to others, it is necessary for them to
adopt new methods of documenting, sharing and
communicating their process so that their design process and

23

tacit knowledge is made explicit and accessible. Through the
tangibility of this knowledge, everyone is able to recognize and
access the designer’s thinking, reasoning and problem solving.
Visualizations in the front-end of the design process helps
designers to replace the written synthesis of their contextual
research such as interviews, which allows them to better
understand and communicate the experience and emotions of
the people they are designing for. Visualizations can be quickly
accessed by designers and others, such that the written form of
data synthesis cannot.

Persona
How well do personas represent the real users? Alan Cooper
defines “personas as the hypothetical individuals that take on
the characteristics of real users” (Kolko, 2007). A persona is
usually created in the early stages of the design process to
visualize and remind designers of who their users are
throughout the design process. It is typically expressed in “the
form of several paragraphs of text, followed by images that
illustrate lifestyle choices, brands and other physical
embodiments of values” (Kolko, 2007).
Personas are mostly stereotypical and generic. They
“attempt to capture individual nuances and peculiarities yet
blend these nuances into a single individual” (Kolko, 2007). The
representation of users through a picture and set of
characteristics does not fully capture the complexity of the real
users.
Personas, when created successfully, need to extend
outside of the given problem space and also be based on the
data gathered from user research. “Unsuccessful design often
comes from the assumption that users like what [designers]
like” (Fritsch, Judice, Soini, & Tretten, 2007). A persona focuses
on the individual user and supports the design project through
its perspective. However, it is static and does not portray its
relationships with other people, things and places.
When designing for experiences, designers not only need to
understand and learn about their users (their needs, wants and

24

expectations), but also be able to walk in their shoes, feel their
emotions and study their actions and reactions in different
situations. They also need to consider the relationships and
points of view of all key players involved.
Visualizing user’s experience through a set of events
supports the complexity of designing for experiences in a way
that static and stereotypical personas do not. By translating
qualitative data through visualizations, designers can display the
multiple perspectives involved in a multi channel experience in a
compressed form. As such, they can portray the relationship of
all the characters and convey their individual point of view in an
integrated fashion versus the individual personas whose
interactions have to be interpreted by the designer.

Sketching User Experiences
There are many methodologies designers use in this fuzzy front
end to gather data through contextual research such as user
observation, probes, interviews, workshops, etc. However,
there is no model for how the information and insight gathered
through these approaches is filtered through to the next stages
of the process to help lead designers to positive outcomes. Bill
Buxton the author of Sketching User Experiences promotes
sketching as a creative approach in the design process and talks
about how the design process is about “getting the right design,
and then getting the design right” (Buxton, 2007). By the right
design he refers to the ideation process, the generation of many
ideas and variations, reflection and choice followed by iteration
and development. He goes further discussing design as a
choice, the creativity that designers bring to enumerating
meaningful distinct options from which to choose and the
creativity they bring to defining the criteria, or heuristics,
according to which they make their choices (Buxton, 2007).
Methods such as sketching support the designer’s vision in the
front-end of the design process to “get the right design“. The
main goal in this early stage of design “is to develop a unique
propriety understanding of who the [users] are what they want
and need, to identify the right problems to solve, and to identify

25

the right questions to ask” (Rhea, 2003).
One of the ways for designers to identify design
opportunities is to diverge their thinking before converging onto
a specific problem; to not only focus in on the pixels, but on the
big picture. Looking at the broad overview of the design
situation enables them to understand the whole system,
allowing them to not follow and “track existing conditions and
assumption and to break out of the current-mindset” (Rhea,
2003). In this phase, it is about discovering and learning
information and utilizing the right tools to support the
communication of these new insights to the key players
involved in the design project. Designers in this phase need to
identify what is important, what aspect of information is
missing, where they see a design opportunity and forecast a
change through synthesis of their gathered data.
Modeling experiences can “explore the emotional benefits
and psychological satisfactions of a product or service [and]
define the necessary ingredients [for] a successful user
experience”. It also enables them to pick “which part of the
user experience to focus in on to enhance (to delight users), and
which aspect [to] minimize (to reduce irritation or
inconvenience)” (Rhea, 2003).
Designers model experiences typically through various
concept mapping techniques and journey frameworks. Concept
maps are “a type of model [that] are used to explore and learn
about complex information spaces. By showing everything—the
forest and the trees—in a single view, concept maps help
people create mental models and clarify thoughts”(Dubberly,
2009). They are mainly used by designers as a communication
tool to share their understandings and vision with peers and
clients. Concept maps typically include short text and arrows
with minimal visual elements; they represent relationships and
relativity of key information and highlight the main issues and
opportunities of user experience.
The journey framework is a method that analyzes a step-bystep journey of users through the main touch-points of their
experiences. Through the journey framework designers highlight
the key areas of the user experience with photographs and

26

populate each section with questions from the different
stakeholders involved. This method is typically used to verify
designers’ proposed solutions within each stage of user
experience by addressing the questions they may have.
My research proposes that visual tools in the front end of
the design process can be used to support the designers’
divergent and convergent understanding of the design situation
and allow them to quickly and clearly communicate their
contextual research to others, as well as frame and prioritize
potential problem areas. Visualization helps designers to identify
the principles for design success and the appropriate metrics for
assessing the effects and quality of their designs by validating
their contextual research and understanding early on. This
enables them to easily recognize reoccurring design problems
through multiple iterations. Visualization of research data
provides the design team with a framework to keep them
solving the right problems, by revealing the problems they want
to solve and highlighting the basic criteria for success.
Ultimately, this facilitates their vision for possible solutions.

Summary
As visualizations are a natural extension of designers’ skills, it is
ideal for them to utilize these techniques to document the fuzzy
front-end of their design process. Through visualization,
designers can analyze the scope of complex design situations by
recording current situations and identifying the missing
information, which engages them to investigate further.
Designers can use visual tools in the early stages of the
design process to better understand the context and culture of
the users and their interactions by synthesizing their research
data through the visualization of the user’s experience.
Visualizations support many points of view by displaying the
models of experiences of all key players involved in the design
situation. Through these various perspectives, designers can
easily distinguish patterns of common design problems, which
optimizes their design decision-making process. Visualizations
also support the iterative nature of design process as they are

27

flexible, modifiable and can built upon.
Further, designers can use visualization as a communication
tool as they are able to share their vision and understanding
through a dialogue understood and accessed by all.
Visualizations allow designers to clearly and quickly explain and
share their mental models with users and other stakeholders
involved in the design project.

28

Storytelling

29

Scenarios
Stories are one of the earliest forms of communication in oral
history. We learn, understand, share, remember and speak
through stories. Storytelling is innately human and can take
many forms: oral, textual or visual. Narratives paired with visuals
are one of the most effective tools for communication.
Scenarios are powerful tools used in film and design to map
out and explore a specific circumstance. As Schön describes,
scenarios in design are “framed experiments, enacting a
possible outcome based on observation and conceptualizing of
the design situation” (Schön, 1983). Scenarios are very
important in the design process as they provide a vision of the
design situation. John M. Caroll talks about five reasons for
scenario-based design (Caroll, 1995):
1. Action versus reflection: vivid descriptions of end-user
experience evoke reflection about design issues
2. Design problem fluidity: scenarios concretely situate
interpretation and solution but are open-ended and
easily revised.
3. External factors constrain design: scenarios anchor
design discussion in work, supporting participation
among stakeholders (designers and user) and
appropriate design outcomes.
4. Scientific knowledge lags design application: scenarios
can be abstracted and categorized to help design
knowledge cumulate across problem instances.
5. Design moves have many effects: scenarios can be
written at multiple levels, from many perspectives, and
for many purposes.
Scenarios are often used in the evaluative phase of the
design process, allowing the designer to situate their design
solution within the context of use. Scenarios help the designer
to validate their designs in the real world by illustrating how it
may function or how it might change a situation for the better.
Through scenarios designers “establish context, illustrate a

30

problem and propose a new solution” (Pruitt and Adlin, 2006).
Designers are often envisioning new-to-world products,
services and environment. Scenarios allow them to predict and
explore the future use of their designs and the problems they
solve. It can also “help designers to uncover and refine
understandings of the potential uses, attitudes, and interactions
that new products, services, virtual and physical spaces need to
support” (Jonsdatter and Gregory, 2006).
Designers use scenarios to display a functionality of their
products, and how users interact with them. Mapping of user
experience is popular amongst designs that involve HCI (humancomputer-interaction). Designers use scenarios as a walkthrough
of possible interactions and to assess usability of complex
systems and interfaces.
Through stories and scenarios designers get a better
understanding of the user’s schema - their mental framework
and pattern of thought organized within a specific situation. The
psychologist Frederick Bartlett describes schema as an “active
organization of past reactions or of past experience…” (as qtd.
in Madej, 2007). It is helpful for designers to be aware and learn
people’s knowledge, perception and reaction in different
circumstances and to facilitate a seamless adjustment with their
new and future designs. Schema theory is especially important
in designing new experiences as the “more familiar and richer
the schema [a designer] brings to a situation the easier it is [for
people] to understand, engage, and learn from” (as qtd. in
Madej, 2007).
By using narrative in the front-end of the design
process the designer is able to enter their user’s current world
and immerse in their experiences. Storytelling creates empathy
for the designer as they can cognitively and effectively connect
with their users.

Storyboard as Narrative
Narrative is one of the ancient ways of communication.
Polkinghorne describes narrative as a “fundamental scheme for
linking individual human actions and events into interrelated

31

aspects of an understandable composite” (Polkinghorne, 1988).
In film, narrative is typically constructed from the
interactions between the story, its characters and their
environment. The development of narrative is attained through a
fluid exploration of characters in their environment, with
dialogue added as the characters come to life. Narrative consists
of two main factors, plot and story. Plot is the presentation of
the narrative events and the story is the relationship and
connection of these events.
Storyboards play an essential role in film and television
production as they support a director’s vision through a
sequence and continuity of actions, relationships and emotions.
These storyboards showcase the flow and development of the
story by displaying the setting, characters and their relationships,
conflict and resolution of the story. Like film, design is based on
narrative. Designers are storytellers. Design process is an
ongoing story that gets built upon. Through the design process
designers understand their characters; recognize the conflict in
their story and work toward a resolution.
Storyboarding in film is widely used as an exploration of
possibilities - it is not based on data, but on fictional situations.
In contrast, my research explores the role of storyboards as a
validation tool for designers’ understanding of stakeholders’
experiences, and the methodical use of storyboards in the early
stages of design process to capture the current experience of
users through translation of contextual research.
Storyboards support well-crafted stories, which include
context, facts, characters, plot and resolution. Good stories are
short and have just the right details: “too little detail and story
loses authenticity; too much and it gets overloaded with
information and loses its clarity” (Pruitt and Adlin, 2006).
Storyboards do not have to be refined to be able to
communicate the story clearly. In fact in Understanding Comics,
Scott McCloud talks about drawing comic book characters. He
says that the less realistic the drawing style the easier it is for
the audience to identify with the characters.
Storyboards are both affective and effective tools in design.
They allow designers to enter the world of their users and

32

experience situations from their point of view. In film
storyboards are often fiction and act as a pre-visualization of a
storyline to be played and constructed by actors and props.
However my research specifically investigates storyboards as a
non-fictional tool in design process. Using storyboards in the
front-end of design process helps to document the reality, the
experiences of people through factual events to better
understand their interactions and relationships.

Storytelling to Capture Experiences
When designing for multi-channel experiences it is crucial to
utilize many methodologies in the early stages of the design
process in order to fully grasp the complexity of the design
scope and understand the many people, activities and
constraints involved.
It is valuable to use a variety of techniques to map out the
different points of view such as the customer and employee
journeys throughout a service experience. Mapping, shadowing,
and ethnography can be used to understand and experience the
customer and employee journey, in the way they would. In
addition to other techniques storytelling can be used to support
these multifaceted experiences on various levels.
Stories can display the customer or employee’s step-bystep journey through a service experience through concise
narrative. They can be short and detailed and communicate the
different conversations involved in a service. They can be
manifested with quotes from the customers and employees and
can clearly highlight problems, opportunities and what is most
valuable in a service.
Service experiences are about relationships and dialogues
between customers, employees and other stakeholders
involved. These relationships and dialogues can only become
evident through narrations. “Services are heterogeneous,
meaning that they are hard to standardize and that they are
variable in performance, due to their dependence on human
judgment and interaction” (Segelstrom and Holmlid, 2009).
Stories showcase the codependence of service production and

33

consumption, as ”a service is not pre-produced and sold off-theshelf, and [its] value is co-created in the service experience by
the producer and the consumer” (Segelstrom and Holmlid,
2009). Storytelling promotes ease of design knowledge transfer
through an informal dialogue, which can be accessed by
everyone involved in the experience.
Designers have the task of designing the “overall
experience, as well as [the] constituent parts” of a service. The
service is a constantly evolving experience “mediated by people
and technology, and […] made manifest through a variety of
messages, products, performances, and processes co- produced
by client(s) and service personnel” (Holmlid and Evenson, 2007).
Narratives reveal the different experience of all key players
involved in the design situation. Comparative stories can be
used in conjunction to display other perspectives. These stories
are rich with details and represent the enactive and depictive
nature of the service process. Service experiences are not
physical objects, they are mostly intangible; most of them
cannot be touched or felt before they are experienced. The
multi-layered nature of stories supports the tangible and
intangible (activity and process) parts of the service experience.
Designers, with these stories, are able to immerse and
participate in their users’ world, grasp and touch it and not just
view it from a distance. These stories can use anecdotes and
data from the research and help designers experience an idea
from the inside, not just as a collection of facts; they become
the “voice of the user”. .”(Pruitt and Adlin, 2006).
Design is a social process and involves many players.
Storytelling allows designers to quickly and clearly communicate
their area of focus to other members of the design team and
external stakeholders. These stories promote collaboration and
innovation by engaging and involving people of different
backgrounds and expertise - from customer to employee - in the
design process. In his article “Design as Storytelling”, Tom
Erickson (1996) defines a good story as one in which “people
have been engaged, drawn into discussion of ideas about which
- before the story - they would have had nothing to say.” These
stories allow the key players involved in the service experience

34

to understand, explore new ideas and possibilities and instigate
their point of view about the proposed design concepts. Through
these stories the designer creates a vision of their user’s world
and invites others to enter it” (Pruitt and Adlin, 2006).

Summary
Through contextual research designers understand the setting of
their story, through observation they get a sense of what their
character does or says, through different dialogues with the
users they have a better understanding of their character’s
thoughts and feelings and their relationships to other characters,
and through the stories’ conflict they identify design
opportunities.
The multilayered nature of storytelling enables designers to
take a holistic approach to understanding and clarifying the fuzzy
front end. Narrative enables designers to realize many
conversations, attend to different voices and immerse
themselves in different experiences. This allows them to view
the complexity of the design situation from the point of view of
different stakeholders, thus helping designers to uncover and
prioritize a range of design factors to focus on, such as,
emotional, physical and social.
Storytelling facilitates communication amongst all the
stakeholders involved. This knowledge-sharing tool can confirm
designers’ understanding of users’ experience through an
informal dialogue. Stories also encourage collaboration by
engaging everyone in the design team to learn, discover details,
question and compare different vocalized experiences.

35

Case Study

36

BC Children’s Hospital Study
I conducted a case study with a third and forth year Emily Carr
University Interaction Design class (INDD 316/416) involved in a
service design project for the BC Children’s Hospital (BCCH).
This study involved 14 interaction design students investigating
the application of the radio frequency identification technology
(RFID) patient tracking system to enhance the patients’ and
hospital staff’s experience in the ER. The goal of this study was
to validate the potential value of visual storytelling techniques
suggested through my theoretical design research.

Figure 6. Storytelling Workshop 1 (Photo by author, ECUAD 2009)

My study took place in four different phases in the front-end of
the design process undertaken by the students in an 8-week
course. My data collection methods included observations,
multiple workshops and a feedback session.
During phase 1 of this study, I engaged the students in
creating visual stories (storyboards) of the patient’s journeys
within the ER department based on their exposure to the tour of
the ER department. These storyboards were to showcase the
step-by-step process of patients through admission, diagnosis
and release within the ER department.

37

Through a workshop, the students described their
storyboards and engaged other students by discussing the
details of their scenarios (see Figure 6). These storyboards were
detailed and represented different points of view: children’s,
parents and staff’s. After the students described their stories, I
asked the students to mark the gaps and holes in their stories
with a different colored post-it note, marking the areas that were
ambiguous and required more information to better understand
the process (see Figure 7).

Figure 7. Marked-up storyboards during workshop 1 (Photo by author, ECUAD 2009)

The different colors represented the unknown information
from different perspectives and were marked mostly with
questions such as what happens if people leave the ER without
telling anyone? Or what happens if a child walks into the ER
department without a guardian? These marked questions from
different perspectives became the bases for the interview
questions for patients and hospital staff and allowed the
students to recognize reoccurring patterns, which made it easy
to identify the unknown parts of the Emergency Department
journey.
During phase 2, through a set of structured questions
produced collectively amongst the class, the students

38

conducted interviews with parents and children. This series of
questions aimed to discover new information about the patient’s
experience within the ER department at the BCCH.
The second set of storyboards was produced based on the
new knowledge gained from the interview sessions. These
storyboards were done from the child and parent’s points of
view and displayed their detailed experiences and emotion.
These stories were also shown to the interviewee to validate
the designer’s understanding and vision of their journey.
The second set of storyboards was produced based on the
new knowledge gained from the interview sessions (see Figure
8). These storyboards were done from the child and parent’s
points of view and displayed their detailed experiences and
emotion. These stories were also shown to the interviewee to
validate the designer’s understanding and vision of their journey.

Figure 8. Storytelling Workshop 2 (Photo by author, ECUAD 2009)

During phase 3, the students conducted interviews with the
hospital staff including a Triage Nurse and Doctor through a
structured and uniform questionnaire produced collectively by
members of the class. Another set of storyboards was produced
to showcase the point of view of hospital staff and their
experience in the ER.

39

During phase 4, each student pinned their three sets of
storyboards on the wall and through a feedback session,
explained their process of understanding in developing each
storyboard. Through comparison each student was able to
identify their increased awareness of the service experience and
its effect of different key players involved.
The analysis of this study included pattern recognition of
students’ increased knowledge and awareness of different user
perspectives through the sequential set of visual stories
produced. A feedback session was also held at the final phase of
this study to gather insights from students about their
experience with the methodical use of visual stories in the frontend of their design process.

Feedback from the Study Participants
The findings from the study confirm some of the advantages of
the visual storytelling method determined in my research.
In capturing the current design situation through the first set of
stories, the students were able to easily and quickly recognize
the gaps in their knowledge and identify patterns of the areas
with missing information such as the admission process within
the ER. The different colors also made it clear who they needed
to approach to gather more insight. As one of the participating
students noted “gathering information is one of the most
important abilities of a designer and the interviews and
storyboards helped me to improve this ability” (Andreas
Stroebel). These patterns became the basis for prioritization and
framing of their interview questions and how they approached
their interview sessions to help them discover the unknown.

40

Figure 9. Marked-up storyboards during workshop 1 (Photo by author, ECUAD 2009)

Having their story and its missing details in mind helped
them to think about the ER experience as a story in a
comprehensive way. This allowed the students to tailor the
interview questions accordingly and to gather specific details
about everyone’s experiences to formulate a richer and more
complete story for the second and third storyboards. Students
noticed that the process “helped [them] to evaluate [any]
preconceived notions about the hospital experience, [and gather
information through speaking] to friends and family informally
about their visits to the emergency room” (Rachel Simpson).
“The first storyboard acted as an anchor to compare later
iterations against. That is, my team storyboarded our preconceptions about the hospital environment only to later
discover that there are some distinct differences in addition
to the similarities between our notions and actual fact. This
exercise helped to organize our thoughts on design
opportunities” (Ryan Nussbacher).

41

Figure 10. Storyboard 2: child’s perspective (Stephanie Vacher, ECUAD 2009)

The second and third stories were very detailed and more
sympathetic as they were informed by specific interview
questions identified during the first storyboard workshop
session and allowed the designers to understand the
Emergency Room Experience more in depth and from different
perspectives. They were very insightful as they revealed specific
information about personal experiences that otherwise could
have been overlooked. For example one of the students’
storyboard captured a shot of a parent driving their child to a
hospital (see Figure 11), which provoked a dialogue about
parking at the hospital, prompting a discussion of parents'
distress while driving their kids to the ER where finding parking
is often an issue. It was great to see discussions happening over
secondary details that were missing from the first set of stories
and had the potential of producing a big impact on someone’s
experience.

Figure 11. Storyboard 2: parent’s perspective (Rachel Simpson, ECUAD 2009)

42

Students commented that their second storyboards “were more
humanistic than the first after conducting the patient interview
by highlighting and capturing the emotional responses of
children during the ER experience. The second was more
comprehensive, detailed [and] from a patient’s perspective”
(Andrew Sui). This process allowed their “understanding of the
ER experience [to become] more complete and more in depth“
(Caylee Raber).
The storyboard exercise supported the iterative design
process. The second and third storyboards acted as a validation
tool to the first story crafted. Through this comparison, the
students were able to recognize the growth of their knowledge,
confirm their understanding and evaluate their preconceived
notions. For instance, through patient’s stories the students
identified the lack of toys in the waiting area, which was not only
less inviting and accommodating to children but also a concern
for parents waiting long hours in the ER and unable to engage
their kids. Through hospital staff stories they discovered that the
toys were eliminated from the waiting area due to the spread of
germs.

Figure 12. Storyboard 3: doctor’s perspective (Stephanie MaCarty, ECUAD 2009)

“The second set has a more clear delineation of the overall
hospital timeline and process. Because I had a more
complete understanding, I was able to include key details,
which were relevant to my project. Dealing with the patient
and the staff’s relationship with the data flow within the
hospital were important, so having an understanding of

43

patient reactions to staff dealing with their (the patients’)
information was essential” (Rachel Simpson).
The comparison between the second and third storyboards
also allowed the students to step back and recognize the
reoccurring patterns within their three sets of storyboards as
well as other students’ work, which verified their problem
identification and optimized their design decision-making. The
organized and visual structure of the storyboards made it easier
for the students to quickly recognize the reoccurring problems
experienced through different stories and points of view. For
instance, the students discovered that patients are typically
unaware of wait times at the ER, which adds to their distress,
and some get agitated and leave without informing the staff.
Students were able to identify the same problem from the
hospital staff point of view, as they were unable to keep track of
everyone in the waiting area and often reported missing patients
without knowing the reason for their disappearance. The
patients had either left the ER due to long waits or wondered off
to different parts of the hospital.
The creation of the storyboards slowed the students’ design
process and they were able to pay closer attention to details by
revisiting their gathered information and understanding the ER
experience more thoughtfully through different points of view.
Through the visual interpretation and translation of raw data into
a narrative, they paid more attention to details and became more
immersed in the experiences of their users. The slower pace of
the process allowed the students the time to reflect on their
stories, share, compare different experiences and contemplate
identified problems.
“I was initially more concerned about improving efficiency
and processes after the first storyboard but the second
storyboard was more a sympathetic look at what patients go
through. It also helped fill little details and gaps that I would
have never considered and note minor changes that could
significantly change the experience of a patient/parent
visiting the hospital” (Andrew Siu).

44

Through the storyboard workshop the students were able to
see each other’s visualization techniques and perspectives.
The workshop allowed them to view their team member’s
understanding of their design situation and translation of
gathered data through their choice of visual language. They
recognized which stories presented and communicated the
user’s voice and experience effectively and were most easy to
relate to. This provided them with an opportunity to learn from
one another and improve their storyboarding skills and make
them stronger.
“Getting several patient perspectives from the other
designers helped diverge my thinking about different user
experiences. It was helpful to note consistent issues among
all patient experiences and interesting to see how each one
differed. This helped prioritize what needs we had to focus
on more. Seeing what went well in each of the scenarios
also helped note what should be left unchanged in our
design proposals” (Andrew Siu)

Figure 13. Storyboard 2: parents’ and child’s perspective (Jacky Ling, ECUAD 2009)

The design students involved in the study were able to
visualize their gathered raw data from observational studies,
user research and interview sessions through these storyboards.
The translation of data through visual narratives allowed
designers to clearly and quickly communicate their findings
through the voice of their users. The designers were also able to
verify the accuracy of the stories by showing these storyboards

45

to the users themselves, which allowed users to become more
involved and facilitated an event for further knowledge sharing
and collaboration. After interviewing a parent, one of the
students' visual stories displayed how that parent had used
Google Map to write down the directions to the BCCH. After
showing this story back to them, the father quickly recognized
missing information and added that he first used Google to
check the symptoms that his son was experiencing to see if it
was an emergency but was overwhelmed with the amount of
information. He then checked the BCCH website to find
directions and map but did not succeed. This exercise allows the
designer to not only validate their understanding but also
become aware of minor details that they could have missed
through an interview session alone.
“The storyboard is a good way to summarize the information
gathered through an interview. It is a good tool to clarify your
understanding...and could be shown to the interviewee to
clarify that you have the correct vision or understanding of
their journey. The storyboard is also very helpful when
working on a group project because it helps to ensure that
both partners are on the same page” (Caylee Raber).
The visual storytelling method supports the complexity of
experience design. These stories displayed the integrated
relationships and dialogues between all key players involved
such as children, parents, doctors, nurses and other hospital
staff. The stories also acted as a collaboration tool amongst the
design students. They were able to discuss and share their
stories with each other and walkthrough and understand the
different experiences and emotions of the characters that were
displayed visually. The stories facilitated social engagement in
their design process as it provoked the element of play by
inviting everyone involved in the design project to discover,
comment and question.

46

Figure 14. Storytelling Workshop 3 (Photo by author, ECUAD 2009)

In sharing their storyboards in the workshop, the students were
able to view others’ understanding and visualization of the same
situation (see Figure 14). Storyboards encouraged dialogue
amongst the class and lead to new understanding and
discoveries. Through these stories the students’ mental models
became obvious and thus more accessible by the members of
their team and other students.
“I think the most helpful thing that came from the
storyboard was actually looking at other people’s
storyboards. Through the storyboard, conversations were
made much easier to understand and thus we were able to
have many different points of view.”(Andrew Chow)
The application of this method also facilitated
communication with non-designers, hospital staff and other
stakeholders involved in the project. It helped the students to
justify their design decision-making and showcase their design
process via visual language, acting as a strong communication
tool to share information with others. For instance, some
students included these visual stories in their final presentation
to the hospital stakeholders to showcase their research and to
justify their reasoning for their proposed design solutions.

47

“The visualization of the process is what makes it evident
and concrete- it’s especially important in communicating the
design development to those who haven’t been involved”
(Rachel Simpson).

Summary
Throughout the case study it became evident that there was a
significant opportunity to leverage both the visualization and
storytelling techniques familiar to designers to more effectively
document and validate user research in the early stages of the
design process.
The methodical approach to developing a sequential set of
storyboards that evolved through the study process
demonstrates the potential to enhance design decision-making,
as it provided the design students with an accessible and
overarching view that enabled their identification and recognition
of design opportunities. These storyboards acted as early
models for understanding, and allowed designers to prioritize
their decisions as they framed problems and explored possible
solutions based on patient and hospital staff experiences and
points of view through visualization and validation of their
research.
The case study made apparent the lack of literature
available to provide guidance and instruction to designers on
how to construct and adapt storyboards to effectively and
accurately portray user experiences during the early stages of
the design process. The majority of students involved in the
study were unsure about how to successfully and clearly
document and communicate their findings through visual
stories.

48

The Visual Storytelling Method

49

The Need for New Methods
The design review section of my research identifies
opportunities for designers to adopt new methods within the
early phases of the design process:
•

To better analyze complex design problems through
synthesizing and validating research data to understand
multiple perspectives.

•

To document their decision-making process and
communicate their design thinking.

•

To practice a more holistic approach in assessing multifaceted design situations.

Opportunities to Leverage Visualization Techniques
Based on my exploration of various visualization tools used
throughout the design process to support designers’
understanding, it is apparent that designers can leverage their
visualization skills and sketching in the early phases of the
design process:
•

As visualization is a natural extension to designers’
abilities, it allows designers to quickly translate
qualitative research data visually to easily recognize and
prioritize design problems.

•

Visualization acts as a common language accessible by
all stakeholders involved in the design project.

•

Visualizations also support the iterative nature of the
design process as they can be carried through the
different stages of the process and be built upon by
adding new knowledge and understanding. They
become “thematic systems” for designers to use in

50

each phase to share and document their thinking and
process (Schön, 1988).

Opportunities to Leverage Storytelling
My examination of the role of narrative in design evidences that
storytelling enhances designers’ understanding in the front-end
of the design process:
•

Storytelling creates empathy for designers, as they are
able to immerse and participate in the world of their
users and experience situations from their point of view.

•

Narratives support the multi-layered nature of
experiences, such as the integrated relationships and
various conversations involved within a design context.

•

Storytelling facilitates knowledge sharing through an
informal dialogue understood and accessed by all.

•

Storytelling promotes collaboration by engaging
everyone involved in the design project to learn,
discover and question

Results from Case Study
The BCCH study verified some of the values of the visual
storytelling method in the early stages of the design process.
•

Methodical use of visual storytelling acted as validation
for design students understanding of patients and
hospital staff experiences by assisting them to translate
and interpret their observational research and user
interviews through visualization and narrative. These
visual stories facilitated a dialogue with the users
themselves as they were able to view these storyboards
and confirm the accuracy of the design students’ view.

51

•

The use of visual stories in the early stages of the
design provided design students with an overarching
view that enabled them to easily recognize gaps in
knowledge, misconceptions, and areas that could
potentially benefit from design opportunities. The
reoccurring patterns within the various storyboards
presented from different perspectives optimized their
decision making process by helping them prioritize
identified design problems.

•

These visual stories made accessible the different
perspectives involved when designing for service
experiences. The students became more aware of the
complex nature of experience design and were able to
think more holistically and view challenges through
different points of view and expectations.

•

The visual storytelling method encouraged collaboration
amongst the students. They were able to discuss and
walkthrough the different experiences and emotions
visually displayed. These stories invited everyone to
comment and question and also acted as a shared
understanding between design students working and
focusing on the same areas of the design project.

•

This study also revealed the lack of literature available to
instruct the students on how to effectively capture user
experiences through visual stories.

52

Conclusion

53

Concluding Comments
My investigations and research suggest that the visual
storytelling method offers significant value in the ambiguous
front-end of the design process as it:
•

Enables designers to synthesize and communicate
research data visually and through the experience and
point of view of users.

•

Acts as a common language between all stakeholders
involved and can be validated by the users themselves.

•

Enhances problem identification and optimizes design
decision-making, by allowing designers to quickly
recognize patterns of reoccurring issues and prioritize
problems through different perspectives.

•

Supports integrative thinking as it reveals different
points of view.

•

Facilitates holistic design by allowing designers to step
back and have a broader view of the design context and
better understand their users’ interactions and
relationship with other people, products, and places over
time. They are able to see how their design not only
affects just a detail but a whole system, thus helping
designers to create optimal experiences.

•

Promotes communication and collaboration and active
participation of all the stakeholders involved in the
design project.

“Stories are more than scenarios, they are what I call a
detailed synthesis of all the project instances, from the
users’ needs and expectations, to the client’s requests and
the designer’s point of view. The stories can now be used as

54

a roadmap for brainstorming and designing new ideas and
solutions. Each element of the story represents a crucial or
problematic element of the project. Designers can go
through each element identifying possible solutions that can
later become design principles useful for the whole
process” (Zamarato, 2008).
The following are detailed answers to the research questions I
set to explore through my thesis.
How can the visual storytelling methods used in early
phases of the design process help designers validate their
research data by presenting the research data in a way that
can be quickly and clearly communicated to all stakeholders
involved in designing experiences?
The methodical use of visual stories in the early stages of the
design process helps designers to replace the written synthesis
of their contextual research, such as interview sessions, with
the visualization and stories of the people they are designing for.
These visual stories can be quickly accessed by all stakeholders
involved in the design project and can be shown to the users to
validate a designer’s understanding.
While viewing the stories users can confirm designers’ vision,
point out any misconceptions and gaps in knowledge, reflect on
their experience and provide designers with more detailed
insights. The visual storytelling method in the early stage of
design process incorporates the importance of participation and
collaboration of the people whose experience is being captured.

How can the visual storytelling methods used in early
phases of the design process help designers to understand
the complex scope of design problems, identify design
opportunities and optimize design decision-making?

55

As the scope of design is changing by including many
perspectives and addressing social and business challenges, it is
necessary for designers to adopt new methods to improve their
understanding in this complex context. The visual storytelling
approach provides designers with an accurate and tangible
framework that facilitates their integrative thinking and
awareness of multiple user communities.
Documenting and communicating research data through
numerous visual stories from different perspectives enables
designers to quickly distinguish problematic issues and prioritize
design opportunities based on different points of view.

How can visual storytelling methods help designers to
visualize, express and choreograph better experiences that
include multiple perspectives?
By constructing these stories, designers are able to think
holistically. They have a better understanding of all interactions
via a range of touch-points over time displayed through the
journey of multiple perspectives involved. This provides
designers with an overview of the design situation and enables
them to easily track the effect of their proposed design solution
through the various stories presented. These visual stories
support the multi-faceted nature of design thinking, thus helping
designers to visualize, create and choreograph better
experiences. Visual storytelling is an activity that supports
human and social interaction in designing for an experience.

Future Directions
As a result of my research and study I am planning and have
begun to create a ‘How to Guide’. This publication will serve as a
learning tool for other designers to help them more effectively
construct and adapt the visual storytelling method in their design
process through a series of recommendations. This guide is to
be used as a workbook for designers as they can contribute to

56

these elements through their own experience of constructing
visual stories. My goal is for this guidebook to become a
constantly evolving document updated by fellow designers. The
guidebook will not serve as a set of rules, but rather a collection
of useful tips, which can be contributed to through different
experiences with the application of the visual storytelling
method. Essentially, it is to act as a collaborative effort that can
be shared amongst designers.

57

Bibliography

58

Bibliography
Barlett, F. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and
social psychology. London: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review,
June 2008.
Buchenau, M. & Fulton Suri, J. (2000). Experience Prototyping.
DIS00 Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems, New
York acquired:
www.viktoria.se/fal/kurser/winograd-2004/p424 buchenau.pdf
Buxton, B. (2007). Sketching User Experiences. San Francisco:
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Buxton, W. (2005). Innovation vs. invention. Rotman Magazine,
Fall 2005, 52-53.
Caroll, J. (1995). Scenario-Based Design: Envisioning Work and
Technology in System Development. New York: Wiley.
Chastain, C. (2008). Experience Themes: An Element of Story
Applied to Design, Spring 2008, IXDA.
Clark, H., Brody, D. (2009). Design Studies, A Reader. Berg.
Oxford, New York.
Cross, N. (Ed.) (1972). Design Participation: Proceedings of the
Design Research Society’s Conference 1971, Academy Editions,
London, UK.
Donald, N. (2002). Design of everyday things. Basic Books:
New York.
Dreyfuss, H. (2003). Designing for People. New York: Allworth
Press.
Dubberly, H. (2009). Concept Maps. Retrieved March, 14, 2010
from www.dubberly.com/cocept-maps
Dubberly, H. and Evenson, S. (2008). The Analysis-Synthesis
BridgeModel. Interactions 15, no.2.
Ehn, P. (1992). Usability: Turning Technologies into Tools.
Oxford University Press.

59

Erickson, T. (1996). Design as Storytelling. ACM.
Evenson, S. (2008). From design thinking to design
conversations. Service Design Conference 2008.
Evenson, S. (2005). Designing for Service. Proceedings of DPPI
2005, Eindhoven.
Few, S. (2006). Visual Communication. Perceptual Edge. Cognos
Innovation Center.
Fritsch, J, Judice, A, et al. (2007). Storytelling and Repetitive
Narratives for Design Empathy: Case Suomenlinna. Design
Inquiries, 2007.
Fullerton, B. (2009). Storytelling and Interaction Design.
Creativity Online acquired: http://creativityonline.com/news/guest-blogger/137982
Fulton Suri, J. (2003). Empathic Design: Informed and Inspired
by Other People’s Experience. In: Koskinen, Battarbee, and
Mattelmäki (eds) Empathic Design, User Experience in Product
Design, Finland IT Press.
Fulton Suri, J. (2003). The Experience Evolution: Developments
in Design Practice. The Design Journal, 6 (2), 39-48.
Fulton Suri, J., Battarbee, K. & Koskinen, I. (2005). Designing in
the Dark - Empathic Exercises to Inspire Design for Our NonVisual Senses. Include2005 International conference on inclusive
design, London acquired:
www.hhrc.rca.ac.uk/programmes/include/005/pro
ceedings/pdf/fultonsurijane.pdf
Gaver, William. (2004). Cultural Probes and the Value of
Uncertainty. Interaction Design, Royal College of Art, 2004.
Hegeman, J. (2008). The Thinking Behind Design. A thesis
submitted to the School of Design, Carnegie Mellon University.
Hellström, M. (2007). Suomenlinna Spatial Gossip. A Workshop
on Spatial Narrative in Design. Helsinki Edita.
Hellström, T. Between idea generation and physical
embodiment: Exploring the ‘fuzzy middle’ in conceptual design.
Holmild, S. & Evenson, S. (2007). Prototyping and enacting
services: lessons learned from human-centered methods. In

60

Proceedings of QUIS 10. Orlando, Florida.
Holmlid, S., & Evenson, S. (2006). Bringing design to services.
Invited to IBM Service Sciences. Management and Engineering
Summit: Education for the 21st century. New York, October.
Holmlid, S. (2007). Interaction Design and Service Design: A
Comparison of Design Disciplines. Nordic Design
Conference 2007.
Jones, John C. (1992). Design Methods: seeds of human
futures. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Jonsdatter, G. Gregory, J. Innovation (2006). Play: Visualization
and Storytelling for Engaging Participation in Design.
Participatory Design Conference.
Kolko, J. (2007). Thoughts on Interaction Design. Brown Bear,
Savannah, Georgia.
Kouprie, M. & Sleeswijk Visser, F. (submitted) A Framework For
Empathy in Design: Stepping Into and Out of the User’s Life.
Lester, P. (2006). Syntactic Theory of Visual Communication,
California State University at Fullerton.
Löwgren, J, & Stolterman, E. (2004). Thoughtful interaction
design: a design perspective on information technology.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Madej, K. (2007). Characteristics of Early Narrative Experience:
Connecting Print and Digital Game. Dissertation. Simon Fraser
University, pp. 39-40.
Mattelmaki, T., Battarbee, K. (2003). Empathy Probes.
Proceedings of Participation and Design Conference, 266-271.
McCloud, S. (1993). Understanding Comics: The invisible Art.
New York: Harper Collins.
Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing Interactions. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Moritz, S. (2005). Service Design: Practical Access to an
Evolving Field. Masters of Science thesis, KISD.
Nielsen, L., Madsen, S. (2006). Storytelling as Method for
Sharing Knowledge across IT Projects. Proceedings of the

61

Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, 1-9.
Norman, D. (1988). The design of everyday things. New York:
Doubleday.
Postma, C. & Stappers, P.J. (2006). A Vision on Social
Interactions as the Basis for Design. CoDesign, Vol. 2 No. 3,
139-155
Prahalad, C.K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation
Experiences: The Next Practice in Value Creation. Journal of
Interactive Marketing,18(3), 5-14.
Polkinghorne, D. (1998). Narrative Knowing and the Human
Sciences. State University of New York Press, Albany.
Pruitt, J. & Adlin, T. (2006). The Persona Lifecycle. Morgan
Kaufmann Publisher. San Francisco, CA.
Rhea, D. (2003). Bringing Clarity to the “Fuzzy Front End”. In
Laurel, B. Design Research: Methods and Perspectives. The MIT
press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. London, England.
Sanders, E.B.N., Stappers, P.J. (2008). Co-creation and the New
Landscapes of Design. CoDesign: International Journal of
CoCreation and Design and Arts, 4(1), 5-18.
Sanders, E. B.-N. (2006). Design Serving People. In: Salmi, E., &
Anusion wu, L. (Eds.) Cumulus Working Papers, Copenhagen,
University of Art and Design, Helsinki, Finland, 28-33.
Sanders, E.B.-N., (2006b). Nurse and patient participatory
workshops for the NBBJ project: Inpatient Tower Expansion for
H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa,
Florida, USA.
Sanders, E.B. N, (2002). From User-Centered to Participatory
Design Approaches. Design and Social Sciences. Taylor &
Francis Books Limited.
Sangiorgi, D. & Pacenti, E. (2008). Emerging practices of Service
Design driven innovation. Service design
conference
2008, Amsterdam.
Schön, D (1988). Designing: Rules, Types, and Worlds’. Design
Studies, 9/3 181-4.
Schön, D (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic

62

Books.
Schank, Roger C. (1990). Tell me a story: Narrative and
Intelligence, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Seglstrom, F. & Holmlid, S. (2009). Visualizations as Tools for
Research: Service Designers on Visualizations. Linkoping
University, Linkoping, Sweden.
Service Design Network. (2005). Service design network
manifesto, Unpublished.
Sleeswijk Visser, F., Stappers, P.J., van der Lugt, R. & Sanders,
E.B.-N. (2005). Contextmapping: Experiences from Practice.
CoDesign,1(2), 119-149.
Sleeswijk Visser, F. & Kouprie, M. Stimulating Empathy in
Ideation Workshops. ID-StudioLab, TU Delft.
Tischler, L. A Designer Takes on His Biggest Challenge Ever.
Fast Company, February 2009.
Tufte, E. (1990). Envisioning Information. Cheshire, Connecticut:
Graphics Press.
Verplank, B. (2003). Interaction Design Sketchbook. CCRMA
course Music 250s, Stanford.
Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Zamarato, M. (2008). Narrative Design. Master of Arts, IUAV
Interaction Design. Italy.

63