Repository navigation
MS2
Kevin Alvarez edited this page Aug 21, 2026
·
4 revisions
The 4 selected problems (from MS2-O1).
- Clothing waste in the fashion industry: Many still-usable clothes end up in landfills instead of being reused, because there's no easy way to connect people who want to get rid of clothes with charities or institutions that could give them a second use.
- Limited parking at Universidad de los Andes: The university's only parking lot forces students into long lines with unpredictable wait times, since there's no real-time information on availability, lot status, or way to reserve a spot.
- No centralized guide to food options around campus: Despite a wide variety of places for breakfast, lunch, snacks, and coffee near the university, there's no single place to discover them, which limits people from finding new spots and slows the growth of promising establishments that rely mostly on word of mouth.
- Campus navigation for newcomers: New students and visitors struggle to get around campus and find places to eat, get coffee, or study, with no interactive tool to locate buildings or get directions from their current location.
One subsection per interview. Each must include all questions asked and the purpose of each question.
| # | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Where do you usually go to eat or grab something when you're hungry or want a break near campus? | Understand current habits and known places |
| 2 | How did you find out about those places? | Understand discovery channels (word of mouth, ads, location) |
| 3 | Tell me about a time you wanted to try a new place near campus but didn't know which one or where to find it. | Elicit a specific situation (critical incident, What-How-Why) |
| 4 | What do you usually do when you don't know what food options are available nearby? | Understand current workaround/coping behavior |
| 5 | What information would you want before deciding where to go eat (price, type of food, distance, hours)? | Identify criteria/features desired in a solution |
| 6 | Have you used any app or resource to search for restaurants/cafés near you? How was that experience? | Benchmark existing tools and expectations |
| 7 | If there were a single place to find all the food options near campus, what would you expect it to have? | Elicit ideal solution / feature wishlist |
| # | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tell me a bit about yourself, how often do you buy clothes, and what does your closet look like in terms of things you actually wear? | Get to know the interviewee and establish their relationship with clothing consumption |
| 2 | What do you currently do with clothes you no longer wear? | Understand current behavior and disposal habits |
| 3 | Walk me through the last time you got rid of clothes. What did you do, step by step? | Elicit a specific situation (critical incident, What–How–Why) |
| 4 | Are there clothes sitting in your closet right now that you don't wear but haven't gotten rid of? Why are they still there? | Surface the "limbo pile" and the friction that keeps items stuck |
| 5 | How do you decide whether a piece of clothing is good enough to donate versus throw away? | Understand decision criteria and perceived quality thresholds |
| 6 | Have you ever donated clothes? How did you find out where to take them, and how did that go? | Understand discovery channels and pain points in the existing process |
| 7 | What made it easy or hard? Tell me about anything that got in the way. | Identify concrete barriers (transport, schedules, distance, information) |
| 8 | Do you know what happens to clothes after you donate them? How do you feel about that? | Explore trust, transparency, and motivation |
| 9 | Have you tried selling or giving away clothes online (Marketplace, apps, WhatsApp groups)? How was that experience? | Benchmark existing alternatives and expectations |
| 10 | If you wanted to donate clothes tomorrow, what's the first thing you would do? | Reveal the default mental model and where it breaks down |
| # | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Can you tell me about the last time you looked for a place to eat or drink near the university? | Explore a recent and specific experience related to finding food options near campus |
| 2 | What were you looking for on that occasion, and which factors were important to you? | Identify the participant's needs and main decision criteria |
| 3 | How did you find out about the food and drink options available at that moment? | Understand the channels currently used to discover nearby establishments |
| 4 | What information did you have before making your decision, and what information was difficult to find? | Identify information gaps that may make the decision process harder |
| 5 | What made you choose that establishment instead of another option? | Understand the priorities and trade-offs involved in choosing a place |
| 6 | Can you describe a situation in which it was difficult to find a place that matched your needs near the university? | Discover specific problems, frustrations, and barriers experienced by the participant |
| 7 | How do you usually discover food or drink establishments that you have not visited before? | Understand current discovery habits and alternative methods used by the participant |
| 8 | Which sources of information or recommendations do you trust when choosing a place, and why? | Explore the role of trust in recommendations, advertisements, and online information |
| 9 | Based on your experiences, what could make finding and choosing a food establishment near the university easier? | Identify unmet needs and improvement opportunities without suggesting a specific solution |
| # | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | How many courses are you taking this semester, and do you live near campus? | Understand the student's context and how much time they spend on campus |
| 2 | How do you usually spend your free time between classes? | Identify current habits and routines during downtime |
| 3 | How do you usually make plans with friends at the university? | Understand current coordination behavior and channels used |
| 4 | Walk me through the last time you tried to coordinate something with a group, what happened? | Elicit a specific situation (critical incident, What-Why-How) |
| 5 | Have you ever skipped doing something because coordinating felt like too much effort? | Measure friction pain point and how often it blocks social plans |
| 6 | What tools do you currently use to coordinate with others? | Benchmark existing tools and workarounds |
| 7 | How often do you feel like you have free time but don't know who else is available? | Validate the core hypothesis — frequency of the problem |
| 8 | How important is it to you to meet up spontaneously vs. planning ahead? | Understand user preference and openness to real-time coordination |
| 9 | Have you ever wished there was an easier way to know when your friends are available on campus? | Gauge awareness and desire for a solution before presenting the concept |
| 10 | Imagine an app where students can mark when they're free on campus and instantly see who else is free nearby. What's your first reaction? | Elicit ideal solution / initial emotional response to the concept |
| 11 | Would you use it? Why or why not? | Assess adoption intent and uncover potential barriers |
| 12 | What would give you confidence to use it, and what would make you distrust it? | Identify trust factors and deal-breakers |
| 13 | What's the one thing that would make this app work or fail for you? | Identify the single most critical feature or risk |
| # | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | How do you usually get to campus, and how often do you drive here in a normal week? | Establish context and confirm the person is a real user of the parking lot |
| 2 | Walk me through what a typical arrival by car looks like, from the moment you leave home until you're in class. | Map the current journey and locate where friction appears |
| 3 | Tell me about the last time you had trouble parking on campus. What happened? | Elicit a specific situation (critical incident, What–How–Why) |
| 4 | How do you decide what time to leave home when you're driving? | Understand planning behavior and hidden buffer time |
| 5 | Before arriving, do you have any idea whether the lot will be full? How do you form that expectation? | Identify the information gap and the mental models used to fill it |
| 6 | What do you do when you get here and the line is long or the lot is full? | Understand current workarounds (street parking, private lots, leaving, waiting) |
| 7 | Roughly how long have you waited in line, and how did that affect the rest of your day? | Quantify the cost of the problem in time and consequences |
| 8 | Has this ever made you late to a class, exam, or meeting? Tell me about it. | Measure severity and validate that the pain is real, not hypothetical |
| 9 | Do you ever ask someone, or check something, to find out how the lot looks before coming? | Benchmark existing informal channels (friends, WhatsApp groups, guards) |
| 10 | Have you used any app or system for parking somewhere else (a mall, another campus, the city)? How was that experience? | Benchmark existing tools and set expectations for a solution |
| 11 | If you could know something about the parking lot before leaving home, what would be most useful to you? | Identify desired information and criteria without proposing a solution |
| 12 | If you could reserve a spot in advance, what would you expect in return, and what would worry you? | Explore willingness to adopt, trust factors, and perceived fairness |
| 13 | Thinking back over this semester, what's the one thing that would most improve parking for you? | Surface the single highest-priority need in the user's own words |
Summary audio (podcast-style, max. 5 min): Listen
| Interview | Full audio | Transcript |
|---|---|---|
| Interview 1 | Entrevista.Moviles.MS2.mp4 |
Does not apply |
| Interview 2 | Listen | Transcript |
| Interview 3 | Does not apply | Transcript |
| Interview 4 | Listen | Transcript |
| Interview 5 | Does not apply | Transcript |
4 complete situations per interview.
| Situation | What | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Discovering her current go-to spot | Tried a new arepa place near the SD building for the first time | A classmate invited her along during a break between classes | To share a break with a friend; ended up preferring it over her previous usual spot |
| 2. Falling back on the known place | When she doesn't know what's available nearby, she just goes to her usual arepa spot | She doesn't actively search or explore other options | With no easy way to discover new places, sticking to what's known avoids the effort and uncertainty of exploring |
| 3. Weighing whether to try somewhere new | Before trying a new place, she wants to know the food type, price, and distance | She informally weighs these factors in her head before deciding to walk over | To avoid wasting time and effort going somewhere that turns out not to be worth it |
| 4. Relying only on word of mouth | Has never used an app or resource to search for restaurants/cafés near campus | She discovers places exclusively through recommendations from friends | No such app or resource exists within her awareness, so word of mouth is the only option available to her |
| Situation | What | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Accumulating until the basket fills | Puts clothes he no longer wears into a basket and waits until it's full before anything happens | No set date or goal; the timing is driven by volume, not by a decision | Donating one item at a time doesn't justify the trip, so he waits until the effort feels worthwhile |
| 2. Delegating the drop-off to his father | His father takes the full basket to a church and handles the entire donation | He doesn't know which church it is or how the process works; he only contributes the clothes | His father already has the channel figured out, so asking costs far less than finding out himself |
| 3. Keeping clothes "just in case" | Holds on to clothes he doesn't wear because he might want to wear them someday | Leaves them in the closet indefinitely, without revisiting the decision | Discarding means admitting the item no longer works for him; postponing costs nothing |
| 4. Filtering what is worth donating | Sorts out which items are good enough to donate before they go into the basket | Applies his own criteria: not torn, not too faded, in generally good condition | He wants the donation to genuinely help; giving something unusable would feel like passing off trash |
| Situation | What | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Choosing a place to eat after class | Looked for a simple place to eat near the university after finishing classes | Considered the location, price, food quality, and speed of service before choosing a familiar establishment | She wanted a convenient, tasty, and affordable option without traveling far or waiting too long |
| 2. Discovering food options through friends | Learned about restaurants and food establishments available around the university | Asked her friends for recommendations and relied on places they had previously visited together | Recommendations from people she trusts reduce uncertainty and make her feel more confident about choosing a place |
| 3. Struggling to locate a recommended establishment | Tried to find an establishment even though she already knew its name and had heard that the food was good | Searched around the area, but the establishment had no visible sign or recognizable facade and was somewhat hidden | Poor visibility and a lack of clear location information make promising establishments difficult to find |
| 4. Evaluating unfamiliar food establishments | Considered whether an unfamiliar establishment was worth visiting | Checked Google reviews, TikTok videos and comments, recommendations from friends, and the appearance of the place's interior | Reviews, recommendations, approximate prices, and an attractive appearance help her determine whether a new place is trustworthy and fits her needs |
| Situation | What | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Laura coordinates plans with friends primarily through WhatsApp, waiting for replies without knowing if anyone is available. | An app that shows real-time availability would eliminate that wait and make coordination immediate. | There is no way to know in real time if someone is free, the only option is to ask and wait. |
| 2 | She has frequently skipped making plans because the coordination effort felt too high. | Reducing coordination to a single glance at who is available would remove that friction entirely. | The process of texting, waiting, and confirming has an energy cost that sometimes outweighs the benefit of the plan itself. |
| 3 | Sometimes her friends are free at the same time as her, but because they have no phone nearby or no signal, the coincidence is lost. | A passive availability status that doesn't require an active response, like marking "I'm free", would solve that missed connection. | Communication depends on both parties being actively available on WhatsApp at the same moment. |
| 4 | What would make her distrust the app is outdated information, someone appearing as free when they no longer are. | The app needs real-time availability updates, and possibly a "confirm you're still free" nudge to keep the data accurate. | If the app doesn't reflect real-time status accurately, it loses its core value completely. |
| Situation | What | How | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Padding the departure time as insurance | Leaves home half an hour earlier than the trip actually requires whenever he drives | Adds the buffer on top of a commute time he already has measured accurately, purely to absorb the unknown wait at the entrance | Traffic is predictable but the parking line is not, so the only way to protect himself from being late is to sacrifice time in advance, every single time |
| 2. Guessing availability from personal superstition | Forms an expectation of how full the lot will be before arriving | Relies on patterns he has built up himself (Tuesdays and Wednesdays are worse, after 8:30 is difficult) with no data to confirm them | No real-time information about the lot exists, so an informal mental rule is the only substitute available to him |
| 3. Abandoning the line and paying for private parking | Left the queue after fifteen minutes without advancing and parked in a paid lot on 19th street, arriving late to class anyway | Made the decision inside the line, with no visibility into how long the remaining wait would be | Once already in the queue, waiting and leaving are both bets; without knowing the remaining time he ends up paying money and still losing the class |
| 4. Avoiding the car entirely on high-stakes days | Does not bring the car on exam days, commuting by TransMilenio even though it takes considerably longer | Removes the variable by choosing the slower option whose duration he can predict | A longer but certain trip is preferable to an uncertain one; the cost of the problem is not only the wait but the loss of the car as a usable option |
At least 2 journey maps, supported by the interview data.
Research basis: This composite journey synthesizes patterns from Interview 1 (Cristal) and Interview 3 (Allison). It does not imply that both participants followed every stage during every visit.
Emotion scale: 1 = very negative, 3 = neutral, and 5 = very positive. These scores are analytical inferences based on the participants' behaviors and experiences, not direct self-ratings.
User: A university student looking for a place to eat near campus.
Scenario: The student becomes hungry during a break or after class and needs to discover, compare, locate, and select a nearby food establishment.
Goal: Find a tasty, affordable, nearby option without spending too much time searching or risking a disappointing choice.
journey
title Current Food Discovery Journey Near Campus
section Need arises
Need a meal after class or during a break: 3: Student
section Discover options
Ask friends and consult scattered sources: 4: Student
section Evaluate alternatives
Compare food type price distance and trust signals: 2: Student
section Choose or fall back
Try a recommendation or return to a familiar place: 3: Student
section Locate the venue
Walk and identify the storefront: 2: Student
section Experience and remember
Confirm quality affordability and service speed: 4: Student
| Dimension | 1. Need Arises | 2. Discover Options | 3. Evaluate Alternatives | 4. Choose or Fall Back | 5. Locate the Venue | 6. Experience and Remember |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| User goal | Find a suitable place to eat during a break or after class | Become aware of the available food options near campus | Determine whether an unfamiliar establishment is worth visiting | Make a convenient decision with minimal risk | Reach and recognize the selected establishment without wasting time | Decide whether the establishment is worth visiting again |
| Actions and behaviors | Looks for something nearby, affordable, and suitable for the available time | Asks friends or classmates, remembers familiar places, and follows recommendations; Allison also checks Google, TikTok, and the appearance of establishments | Compares food type, products, price, distance, quality, reviews, and service speed | Tries a new place when a trusted recommendation provides confidence; otherwise, returns to a familiar establishment | Walks toward the location and searches for a sign, entrance, facade, or other recognizable feature | Orders and evaluates the food, price, and speed of service; a positive experience can turn the establishment into a familiar option |
| Touchpoints | Class schedule, campus location, break time | Friends, classmates, word of mouth, Google, TikTok, and physical exploration | Reviews, comments, recommendations, menus, prices, and location information | Previous experiences, remembered recommendations, and familiar establishments | Streets near campus, maps, storefronts, signs, logos, and facades | Food, service, establishment, personal memory, and recommendations |
| Needs and expectations | Find something convenient without spending too much time or money | Receive trustworthy suggestions about nearby places | Know whether the establishment matches the student's budget, preferences, and available time | Feel confident enough to select an unfamiliar option | Know the exact location and how to recognize the entrance | Confirm that the establishment is tasty, affordable, and convenient |
| Pain points | Limited time makes distance and service speed important | Information is fragmented and discovery depends heavily on recommendations or scattered platforms | Food type, price, distance, reviews, and other decision criteria are not available in one place | Missing information encourages students to repeatedly choose the same familiar establishments | Hidden locations, unclear directions, and barely visible signs or facades make some establishments difficult to find | Successful discoveries and recommendations remain dispersed instead of being preserved in one centralized resource |
| Emotion | 3/5 — Focused | 4/5 — Hopeful when a trusted recommendation is available | 2/5 — Uncertain | 3/5 — Relieved, but limited by familiarity | 2/5 — Frustrated | 4/5 — Satisfied when the choice is successful |
| Opportunities | Display options based on walking distance, available time, and price range | Create a centralized guide containing varied and trustworthy recommendations | Provide comparable cards with food type, menu, approximate prices, distance, reviews, service speed, and venue photos | Add filters that help students confidently consider unfamiliar establishments | Include exact map pins, walking directions, storefront photos, and recognizable landmarks | Allow students to save favorites, leave reviews, and share recommendations after visiting |
| Evidence | I1-Q5, I3-Q1, I3-Q2 | I1-S1, I1-Q6, I3-S2, I3-S4 | I1-S3, I3-S1, I3-S4, I3-Q9 | I1-S2, I3-S1, I3-S2 | I1-S3, I3-S3 | I1-S1, I3-S1, I3-S2 |
- I1-S1: Cristal discovered a new arepa establishment after a classmate invited her and later preferred it over her previous usual place.
- I1-S2: When Cristal does not know which options are available, she returns to her familiar arepa establishment.
- I1-S3: Cristal considers food type, products, price, and distance before trying somewhere new.
- I1-Q5: Cristal considers distance to determine whether she has enough time to travel and wait.
- I1-Q6: Cristal has never used an application or resource to search for nearby restaurants or cafés.
- I3-S1: Allison considers location, price, food quality, and service speed when choosing where to eat.
- I3-S2: Allison asks friends for recommendations and relies on establishments they have previously visited together.
- I3-S3: Allison struggled to locate a recommended establishment because it was hidden and lacked a visible sign or recognizable facade.
- I3-S4: Allison uses Google reviews, TikTok content, recommendations, and the appearance of the establishment when evaluating unfamiliar options.
- I3-Q9: Allison suggested a visible list of recommended establishments containing approximate food prices.
Students do not lack food options near campus; they lack a reliable and centralized way to discover, compare, and locate them. Trusted recommendations encourage exploration, while incomplete information and difficult-to-find locations push students back toward familiar establishments.
| Dimension | 1. Free Time Opens Up | 2. Wonder Who's Available | 3. Reach Out | 4. Wait for a Response | 5. Meet Up or Fall Back | 6. Reflect on the Experience |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| User goal | Recognize that a gap exists and decide whether to use it socially | Identify which friends might be free at the same time on campus | Confirm availability and agree on a meeting point | Get a reply fast enough so the window doesn't close | Either connect with a friend or pivot to a productive solo activity | Make sense of whether campus social time is working for her |
| Actions | Finishes a class and notices she has an unscheduled block; mentally runs through who might be around | Thinks about friends who share the same gap or whose schedule she knows; checks WhatsApp | Sends messages to several friends at once; waits to see who responds first | Checks her phone repeatedly; if no one replies in time, opens her laptop and starts working | Meets the friend on campus if someone responds; otherwise reads or does homework alone | Recalls missed connections and coincidences that could have happened but didn't |
| Touchpoints | Class schedule, physical campus, personal routine | Memory of friends' schedules, shared classes, WhatsApp last-seen | WhatsApp messages, phone notifications | Phone, campus Wi-Fi, notifications | Campus common areas, cafeteria, library; or laptop and course materials | Personal memory, next class, social patterns over the week |
| Emotion | 😐 3/5 — Hopeful | 😕 2/5 — Uncertain | 🙂 3/5 — Trying | 😤 2/5 — Frustrated | 😊 4/5 — Satisfied if she meets someone / 😌 3/5 — Resigned if alone | 🤔 3/5 — Neutral, but aware of what was missed |
| Pain points | Gaps between classes are rare because her schedule runs back to back | There is no way to know who is free right now without asking each person individually | Sending messages to multiple people and waiting for replies has an energy cost that sometimes outweighs the benefit | Friends might have no phone nearby, no signal, or simply be occupied — the coincidence is lost | Has skipped making plans many times because the coordination effort felt too high | Good coincidences that could have become plans were never visible in the first place |
| Opportunities | Surface available friends automatically when a gap appears, without requiring her to initiate | Show a real-time list of who is on campus and free right now, without needing to ask | Replace the waiting loop with a passive availability status others can see without replying | Eliminate the reply dependency — if she can see someone is free, no message is needed | Reduce the friction between "I have time" and "I'm actually with someone" | Let her see patterns over time: who she connects with, when, and how often |
| Evidence | I4-Q7 — gaps are rare; when she has one she messages everyone she knows who shares it | I4-S4 — friends may have no phone or signal; coincidences are lost without visibility | I4-S1 — coordinates via WhatsApp or in person during shared classes | I4-Q5 — has skipped plans "muchas veces" because coordination felt like too much effort | I4-S2 — when no one responds she falls back to homework or readings | I4-S4 — missed connections recur because there is no passive way to signal availability |
| Code | Situation |
|---|---|
| I4-S1 | Laura coordinates plans with friends through WhatsApp or by talking to them when they share a class |
| I4-S2 | When friends don't respond or aren't available, she falls back to doing homework or reading before the next class |
| I4-S3 | She would use the app immediately — her first reaction was "súper genial" because she would know who's free without having to wait for a reply |
| I4-S4 | Friends sometimes don't have their phone nearby, are busy, or have no signal — so potential meetups are lost even when both people happen to be free |
| I4-Q5 | She has skipped making plans "muchas veces" because the coordination effort felt too high relative to the benefit |
| I4-Q7 | Her schedule runs back to back, so free gaps are rare; when she does have a long one, she messages everyone she knows who shares it |
| I4-Q9 | She would distrust the app if availability status were outdated — the core value is knowing someone is free right now, not ten minutes ago |
Problem addressed: No centralized guide to food options around campus.
Guiding question:
How might we help university students quickly discover, compare, and locate diverse food options near campus using trustworthy and centralized information?
Brainstorming tool: Padlet
-
Research review: The team reviewed the main findings from Interview 1, Interview 3, and Journey Map 1 — Discovering Food Options Near Campus. Special attention was given to fragmented discovery channels, dependence on recommendations, missing comparison information, repeated use of familiar establishments, and difficulty locating hidden venues.
-
Individual ideation: Each team member independently posted at least three ideas in their assigned Padlet column. One idea was placed on each note, together with the contributor's name and the interview finding, situation, or journey-map stage that inspired it.
-
Divergent thinking: During the initial ideation stage, ideas were added without criticism or feasibility discussions. Team members were encouraged to propose conventional, ambitious, digital, and non-digital alternatives.
-
Idea sharing: Each member briefly explained their proposals so the rest of the team could understand their purpose. Evaluation was postponed until every contribution had been presented.
-
Affinity grouping: Related ideas were organized into the following categories:
- Discovery and visibility
- Comparison and quick decision-making
- Trust and student recommendations
- Location and navigation
- Saving and sharing discoveries
-
Duplicate review: Exact duplicates were combined, while ideas with meaningful differences were preserved or merged into stronger concepts.
-
Voting and prioritization: Each member received three votes. Ideas were evaluated according to user desirability, alignment with the research, potential impact, feasibility, and suitability for a low-fidelity prototype.
-
Selection: The highest-priority ideas were shortlisted. Compatible ideas were combined into a more complete solution concept rather than being treated as mutually exclusive alternatives.
| Criterion | Guiding Question |
|---|---|
| User desirability | Does the idea respond to a need identified in the interviews? |
| Research alignment | Does it address a pain point or opportunity from Journey Map 1? |
| Potential impact | Could it significantly improve discovery, comparison, or navigation? |
| Feasibility | Can the team represent and test it through a low-fidelity prototype? |
| Accessibility | Could students with different budgets and needs benefit from it? |
| Solution | Origin (situation / journey map / interview) |
|---|---|
| 1. "The friend who knows" podium: Informal recognition (badge/meme) for whoever gives the most accurate recommendations, gamifying the trusted-friend role | Combined journey map: trust comes from social validation, not anonymous reviews; Situation 4 (Interview 1) — relies exclusively on word of mouth |
| 2. Craving" mailbox: Students drop a note with what they're craving that day (e.g. "something sweet and cheap") and others respond with recommendations, like a food-themed pen-pal exchange | Situation 2 (Interview 1) — defaults to the known place when no info is available; Journey Map discovery stage — relies on asking friends |
| 3. Weekly recommendations board: A physical board in a high-traffic spot (cafeteria, SD building) with post-its/cards where students post their weekly food find, price, and what they ordered | Shared decision criteria across both interviews (price, food type, distance); Journey Map opportunity — centralize recommendations that already come from real people |
| 4. Campus Food Explorer: A centralized guide with list and map views, exact location pins, walking directions, storefront photographs, food categories, approximate prices, and distance from campus. | Interview 1, Situations 2 and 3: students return to familiar places and need information about food type, price, and distance. Interview 3, Situation 3: Allison struggled to locate a hidden establishment. Journey Map 1: Discover Options, Evaluate Alternatives, and Locate the Venue. |
| 5. Quick Match: A recommendation tool that suggests establishments according to the student's budget, preferred food type, available time, maximum walking distance, and desired service speed. | Interview 1, Situation 3: Cristal considers food type, price, distance, and available time. Interview 3, Situation 1: Allison considers location, price, quality, and service speed. Journey Map 1: Need Arises and Evaluate Alternatives. |
| 6. Student Picks: A community section where students can leave short reviews, ratings, photographs, recommendations, and practical information about nearby establishments. | Interview 1, Situation 1: Cristal discovered a new place through a classmate. Interview 3, Situations 2 and 4: Allison trusts friends, Google reviews, TikTok content, and other users' comments. Journey Map 1: Discover Options and Experience and Remember. |
| 7. Today's Deal alerts: Push notifications when nearby restaurants post daily specials or discounts, so students never miss a deal between classes. | Journey Map: Need Arises — price and time pressure are the first filters students apply; Journey Map opportunity — surface time-sensitive options before the student even starts searching. |
| 8. Student-to-student reviews: A rating system where only verified university students can leave reviews, making recommendations more trustworthy than generic platforms. | Interview 3, Situation 4: Allison trusts friends and fellow students over anonymous platforms. Journey Map: Discover Options and Experience and Remember — trusted social validation is the primary discovery driver. |
| 9. Dietary needs tag: Each establishment is tagged with options like vegan, gluten-free, halal, or lactose-free, so students with dietary restrictions can filter instantly. | Journey Map: Evaluate Alternatives — students compare food type and suitability before deciding; Journey Map opportunity — provide comparable cards that include dietary information alongside price and distance. |
The team combined the strongest elements of the shortlisted ideas into a centralized campus food guide. The proposed concept would allow students to:
- Discover establishments through a list or interactive map.
- Compare food type, approximate prices, distance, and service speed.
- View exact locations, storefront photographs, and walking directions.
- Filter options according to their budget, preferences, and available time.
- Consult recommendations and reviews from other students.
- Save and share useful establishments.
This direction addresses the complete journey identified in the research: discovering available options, comparing alternatives, making a confident decision, locating the establishment, and remembering or recommending a successful experience.
Each Padlet contribution includes the team member's name, allowing individual participation and the evolution from initial ideas to the selected concept to remain visible.
The first solution proposed by the team is UniEat, a centralized mobile experience designed to help university students discover, compare, choose, and locate food establishments near campus.
The prototype responds to the main insight obtained from Interviews 1 and 3 and Journey Map 1:
Students do not lack food options; they lack a reliable and centralized way to discover, compare, and locate them.
Although the prototype includes a consistent visual identity, it is considered an initial blueprint because its information, navigation, and interactions are still illustrative and must be validated with users.
| Item | Description |
|---|---|
| Solution name | UniEat |
| Prototype stage | First low-fidelity prototype / blueprint |
| Design tool | Google Stitch |
| Prototype link | View the UniEat prototype in Google Stitch |
| Video link | Watch the prototype presentation |
| Estimated video duration | Approximately 5 minutes |
The solution was developed from the information collected during Interviews 1 and 3, the combined journey map, and the team's brainstorming process.
The research showed that students:
- Use fragmented sources to discover food establishments.
- Depend heavily on recommendations from friends and classmates.
- Consider price, distance, food type, available time, quality, and service speed.
- May return to familiar establishments when information is incomplete.
- Can experience difficulties locating unfamiliar or poorly identified places.
Based on these findings, the team formulated the following design question:
How might we help university students discover, compare, and locate nearby food options in a quick, trustworthy, and centralized way?
During the brainstorming process, each team member contributed ideas through a Padlet board. The ideas were reviewed and organized into themes such as food discovery, comparison, trusted recommendations, affordability, location, accessibility, and quick decision-making.
The final concept combined ideas such as:
- Campus Food Explorer
- Student Picks
- Quick Match
- Menu and Budget Board
- Hidden Gems Spotlight
- [Insert any additional selected Padlet idea]
These ideas were integrated into a single proposed solution: UniEat.
| Feature | Description | Research or Brainstorming Origin |
|---|---|---|
| Centralized Food Map | Displays nearby food establishments in one place and allows students to explore their locations. | Campus Food Explorer; fragmented discovery and location difficulties |
| Category and Price Filters | Allows students to compare establishments according to food type and approximate price range. | Quick Match; price and food type identified in both interviews |
| Open Now Filter | Explores how students could avoid considering unavailable establishments when they have limited time. | Design hypothesis derived from time constraints |
| Establishment Cards | Present essential information such as specialty, walking time, approximate price, and location. | Menu and Budget Board; comparison and location stages |
| Student Recommendations | Highlights food options suggested by members of the university community. | Student Picks; dependence on word-of-mouth recommendations |
| Verified Reviews | Proposes ratings, photographs, and comments from verified students to strengthen trust. | Student Picks; verification remains a hypothesis to validate |
| Dietary Filters | Includes vegan, gluten-free, halal, and lactose-free alternatives. | Accessibility and inclusion hypothesis to be tested |
| Deal of the Day | Displays a featured meal, its approximate price, discount, and establishment information. | Menu and Budget Board and Hidden Gems Spotlight |
| Lunch Roulette | Recommends an option based on a budget between COP 5,000 and COP 30,000 and an available time of 15, 30, or 45 minutes. | Quick Match; budget, time, distance, and indecision findings |
- The student recognizes the need to find food.
- The student opens UniEat and explores nearby establishments.
- The student filters the results by category, price, availability, or dietary needs.
- The student compares information and recommendations.
- The student selects an establishment or uses the Lunch Roulette.
- UniEat displays the selected place, approximate price, and walking time.
- The student locates the establishment and can later share their experience.
| Screen | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Food Map | Centralize nearby establishments and support location |
| Recommendations | Present food options suggested by students |
| Deal of the Day | Highlight affordable offers and local establishments |
| Student Reviews | Provide community opinions, ratings, and photographs |
| Dietary Filters | Narrow the results according to dietary requirements |
| Lunch Roulette | Support quick decisions based on budget and available time |
The video presents:
- The problem identified through the interviews.
- The principal findings from Journey Map 1.
- The team's brainstorming and selection process.
- The proposed UniEat solution.
- A walkthrough of the main prototype screens.
- The relationship between the features and the research findings.
- Evidence of each team member's participation.