ERIC COX FENRICK JAMES

1. ERIC COX FENRICK JAMES

2. Table of Contents • Problem Space • Project Scope • Conceptualization • Requirements • Prototypes • Sketches & Low Fidelity • High-Fidelity Prototype • Evaluation Results • User’s Feedback • Summary of Findings

3. Problem Space • Restaurants compete for patrons by advertising their atmosphere, not just menu items (ex. Dave & Busters). • However, most restaurants do not offer a unique dining experience or advanced ordering system. • Restaurants fail to provide activities for all members of families or groups while at the table. Especially during the ordering process.

4. Project Scope • For restaurant goers, many restaurants lack the social experience while dining that they desire. • Table and application envelops several aspects of the social experience that will enhance the overall dining experience. • Easy to navigate ordering system • Interactive multi-player games • Coloring games for younger children • Access to local and national news • Live video feed of chef and staff in kitchen • Chef tweets

5. Conceptualization • Our concept is to provide an interactive dining system that will: • Maximize the utility of the patrons time while dining • Allow users to divide the table application into quadrants for ease of use among the group • Ease the pressure of ordering when server is ready • Allow patrons to participate in activities among their own group or other groups of all ages throughout the restaurant • Provide live, behind the scenes access to chef and staff activities

6. Requirements • Functional • The overall system must be easy to use • The system ordering process must be reliable • The system must provide content that is usable for patrons of all ages • Usability • The system will be accessible at all times • The system interface will be easily learnable • The system will leverage the user’s domain knowledge by using appropriate language and icons.

7. Requirements (cont….)Flowchart

8. Sketches

9. Sketches (cont….)

10. Low Fidelity Prototype testing

11. Low Fidelity Prototype

12. Low Fidelity (cont…) 6 y/o daughter DAD MOM 13 y/o son

13. High Fidelity Prototype

14. High Fidelity (cont….)

15. DEMO!

16. Evaluation Results (positive) • We interviewed users with a varying amount of interest in their dining experience. • Couples with children and dating or married without children • Interested in the system and its ability to ‘entertain’ the family as they dine together • Games/coloring books are a great tool for younger family members • Brings families/people together at a time when they can ‘interact’ as personal schedules are much busier in today’s society • Allows for a quicker, but less pressurized way of ordering • A fun aspect of ‘reality tv’ with the live kitchen feeds

17. Evaluation Results (negative) • Ability to setup the table for odd numbers of guests • If a family of 3, how can the table be utilized • Simplified home menu for small children • Would like the ability to choose ‘child’ home menu that provided appropriate content • Were lost on how to connect with other gamers in the restaurant • Enjoyed electronic ordering process, but what about paying at the table • Would like the option to pay electronically at the table for better credit card security

18. Integration of Results • Considering the users feedback with future design we will: • Design a table split for odd numbers of patrons up to 5 • Design additional selection processes for smaller children’s content • Provide links for patrons to ‘connect’ to other gaming patrons • Provide the ability to pay electronically at the table

19. QUESTIONS?