Awarded 1st Place at the 2025 UMSI Expo!
Awarded 1st Place at the 2025 UMSI Expo!
Awarded 1st Place at the 2025 UMSI Expo!
White Pine Library Cooperative
White Pine Library Cooperative
White Pine Library Cooperative
My Role
UX Designer
Client
White Pine Library Cooperative
Timeline
August 2024-April 2025
Tools
Figma, FigJam, Miro, Qualtrics
Client-based project for the UX Capstone Course at the University of Michigan.
Client-based project for the UX Capstone Course at the University of Michigan.
Client-based project for the UX Capstone Course at the University of Michigan.
The Challenge
Modernizing a Mission-Critical Tool
Michigan’s rural libraries face challenges accessing out-of-state materials due to costly subscriptions. The White Pine Library Cooperative’s interlibrary loan website helps bridge this gap. A website redesign is needed to ensure the program’s longevity and guarantee equitable access to information for Michigan residents.
Michigan’s rural libraries face challenges accessing out-of-state materials due to costly subscriptions. The White Pine Library Cooperative’s interlibrary loan website helps bridge this gap. A website redesign is needed to ensure the program’s longevity and guarantee equitable access to information for Michigan residents.
Michigan’s rural libraries face challenges accessing out-of-state materials due to costly subscriptions. The White Pine Library Cooperative’s interlibrary loan website helps bridge this gap. A website redesign is needed to ensure the program’s longevity and guarantee equitable access to information for Michigan residents.
Project Structure
We approached this project in 3 phases
I worked with 3 other students to create a user-centered solution for the White Pine Library Cooperative. We completed our work in a Research, Design, and Evaluation phase.
I worked with 3 other students to create a user-centered solution for the White Pine Library Cooperative. We completed our work in a Research, Design, and Evaluation phase.
I worked with 3 other students to create a user-centered solution for the White Pine Library Cooperative. We completed our work in a Research, Design, and Evaluation phase.
Research Phase
Methods
We employed a mixed-method approach that included both qualitative and quantitative techniques to gather a well-rounded understanding of user needs.
We employed a mixed-method approach that included both qualitative and quantitative techniques to gather a well-rounded understanding of user needs.
We employed a mixed-method approach that included both qualitative and quantitative techniques to gather a well-rounded understanding of user needs.
14
14
Librarians
Librarians
4
4
Students
Students
Screening Surveys
Screening Surveys
Segment users, identify common issues and find research participants
Segment users, identify common issues and find research participants
5
5
Librarians
Librarians
User Interviews
User Interviews
Explore workflows, challenges, and new ideas with current users
Explore workflows, challenges, and new ideas with current users
5
5
Librarians
Librarians
Contextual Inquiries
Contextual Inquiries
Observe real-time interactions and task flows in the interlibrary loaning system
Observe real-time interactions and task flows in the interlibrary loaning system
Internal Team
Internal Team
Heuristic Evaluation
Heuristic Evaluation
Identify usability issues using Nielsen's 10 heuristics
Identify usability issues using Nielsen's 10 heuristics
Research Analysis
Affinity Diagram
After completing our initial research, we used affinity mapping to group common themes of user insights.
After completing our initial research, we used affinity mapping to group common themes of user insights.
After completing our initial research, we used affinity mapping to group common themes of user insights.
Key Findings
Request Visibility and Workflow Clarity
Lack of easy viewing of current requests. Users must manually search by patron name or book title in order to view a request.
Lack of easy viewing of current requests. Users must manually search by patron name or book title in order to view a request.
Lack of easy viewing of current requests. Users must manually search by patron name or book title in order to view a request.
No immediate confirmation: Users are uncertain if a request was submitted unless they check another page.
No immediate confirmation: Users are uncertain if a request was submitted unless they check another page.
No immediate confirmation: Users are uncertain if a request was submitted unless they check another page.
Notification Limits
Over reliance on email: Alerts are primarily sent via email, often overlooked or missed.
Over reliance on email: Alerts are primarily sent via email, often overlooked or missed.
Over reliance on email: Alerts are primarily sent via email, often overlooked or missed.
Desire for in-system updates: Users expressed a strong preference for internal notifications or a dashboard.
Desire for in-system updates: Users expressed a strong preference for internal notifications or a dashboard.
Desire for in-system updates: Users expressed a strong preference for internal notifications or a dashboard.
Confusing Status Labels & Navigation
Users struggled with terminology like "request" vs. "loan" and what each action implied.
Users struggled with terminology like "request" vs. "loan" and what each action implied.
Users struggled with terminology like "request" vs. "loan" and what each action implied.
Navigation to specific features (e.g., tracking past requests) was not intuitive.
Navigation to specific features (e.g., tracking past requests) was not intuitive.
Navigation to specific features (e.g., tracking past requests) was not intuitive.
Data Entry Issues and System Feedback
Entering ISBN or OCLC numbers caused errors and required tab-switching from external databases.
Entering ISBN or OCLC numbers caused errors and required tab-switching from external databases.
Entering ISBN or OCLC numbers caused errors and required tab-switching from external databases.
Lack of inline validation led to submission mistakes or uncertainty.
Lack of inline validation led to submission mistakes or uncertainty.
Lack of inline validation led to submission mistakes or uncertainty.
Accessibility and Interface Design
Users expressed the need for a modern interface, better font sizes, improved contrast, and clearer layouts.
Users expressed the need for a modern interface, better font sizes, improved contrast, and clearer layouts.
Users expressed the need for a modern interface, better font sizes, improved contrast, and clearer layouts.
The systems dated design limited ease of use, especially for new or infrequent users.
The systems dated design limited ease of use, especially for new or infrequent users.
The systems dated design limited ease of use, especially for new or infrequent users.
User Personas
We then developed two user personas to guide our design decisions and meet their distinct workflows and needs.
We then developed two user personas to guide our design decisions and meet their distinct workflows and needs.
We then developed two user personas to guide our design decisions and meet their distinct workflows and needs.
User Persona 1: Experienced System User
User Persona 1: Experienced System User
User Persona 1: Experienced System User
User Persona 2: Novice System User
User Persona 2: Novice System User
User Persona 2: Novice System User
User Journey Map
Next we created a user journey map to visualize the current system workflow.
Next we created a user journey map to visualize the current system workflow.
Next we created a user journey map to visualize the current system workflow.
User Journey Map
User Journey Map
User Journey Map
Design Phase
Feature Prioritization
We started our design phase by ideating proposed redesigns and features, which we then prioritized using a feasibility-value matrix to ensure alignment with user needs and client goals. Feasibility = something we should prioritize AND is feasible to design.
We started our design phase by ideating proposed redesigns and features, which we then prioritized using a feasibility-value matrix to ensure alignment with user needs and client goals. Feasibility = something we should prioritize AND is feasible to design.
We started our design phase by ideating proposed redesigns and features, which we then prioritized using a feasibility-value matrix to ensure alignment with user needs and client goals. Feasibility = something we should prioritize AND is feasible to design.
Feature Prioritization Matrix
Feature Prioritization Matrix
Feature Prioritization Matrix
Low-Fidelity Sketches
Low-Fidelity Sketches
Low-Fidelity Sketches
Low-Fidelity Sketches
Mid-Fidelity Wireframes
Mid-Fidelity Wireframes
Mid-Fidelity Wireframes
Mid-Fidelity Wireframes
Evaluation Phase
Usability Tests
We conducted 5 usability tests with current users to update our Figma prototype.
We conducted 5 usability tests with current users to update our Figma prototype.
We conducted 5 usability tests with current users to update our Figma prototype.
My teammate and I reviewing our designs during peer critiques
My teammate and I reviewing our designs during peer critiques
My teammate and I reviewing our designs during peer critiques
High-Fidelity Wireframes
High-Fidelity Wireframes
High-Fidelity Wireframes
High-Fidelity Wireframes
Impact
Impact
Impact
We presented our project at the 2025 UMSI Student Exposition, winning 1st place for the Bachelor student category!
We presented our project at the 2025 UMSI Student Exposition, winning 1st place for the Bachelor student category!
We presented our project at the 2025 UMSI Student Exposition, winning 1st place for the Bachelor student category!
We also validated our Figma prototype with current users, achieving a System Usability Scale (SUS) score of 95 for the new design. The team also presented our design to the client, gaining final approval for the project.
We also validated our Figma prototype with current users, achieving a System Usability Scale (SUS) score of 95 for the new design. The team also presented our design to the client, gaining final approval for the project.
We also validated our Figma prototype with current users, achieving a System Usability Scale (SUS) score of 95 for the new design. The team also presented our design to the client, gaining final approval for the project.
