Learning Launch 

 Challenge   I am a UX / UI Lead for a large energy company . I create workflows and interfaces for engineers   to work more efficiently and effectively . The goal of many of my projects is to redesign an   outdated software interface to make it more intuitive for new engineers . The challenge is that   engineers approach project design differently , depending on the region of the world .     Selection   I use the Learning Launch approach because , given the broad scope and design variables , it   allows me to ideate and test various interface designs with engineers . By watching them use   these quick prototypes , I can quickly iterate to find a solution that will work well for all users .     Application   As with all Design Thinking processes , it is important to start with a definitive goal in mind and a   deep understanding of the audience . Once the business requirements / goals are determined , the   process begins .     When selecting the users for this research , I select 10 - 20 engineers who represent the largest   office regions . Recorded remote interviews and observations regarding the current interface and   expectations help to uncover insights that ca n’t be found using purely survey and analytical   data . I start by asking questions regarding their experience with the software , what they   currently like and dislike about the software , and their background . I then ask them to perform   6 - 8 primary software tasks and have them use think - aloud protocol to describe why they are   making certain decisions as they step through the tasks . I follow this series of tests with a   post - test debriefing , asking what they found confusing , what could be better , and if there are   features they ’d like to add or remove . I subsequently send them an SUS ( System Usability   Scale ) survey regarding their experience to get an analytical baseline for usability and a few   follow up questions .     Next , ideation takes place based on insights found from observations and interviews . This   usually occurs as a series of mind mapping / whiteboarding / post - it note sessions with my team .   By clustering many of the observations , we are able to determine the primary user pain points   across regions and platforms . We are often able to simplify how a certain software process   currently works by eliminating several steps that users found unhelpful or unnecessary .     From here , I create a quick prototype that focuses on functionality and test it with the same set   of users . If they find the new workflow / update meets the goals that we set out to accomplish ,   then the prototype is tested with a larger group of engineers before going into actual production   and development . If the prototype does not meet the goals , needs and expectations of the   project and the users , another prototype will be created and tested . If the prototype does test   well with the larger audience , then a full design / development / user testing plan is put into place . 

 Insight   What I learn from performing this method of design thinking is that allowing the users to interact   with quick prototypes prior to full development allows for much more truthful feedback than with   a survey . It also leads to much better results than simply interviewing and proceeding with what   our team feels is right . By allowing the users to interact with a prototype and get their real - time   feedback on the system , we are able to take a fairly accurate glimpse of the future state of the   software without having to invest much time or money .     Approach   An alternative approach to this challenge would be Visualization / Visual Thinking . By working   with the engineers in groups of stakeholders , as well as individually , and starting with a workflow   diagram of current software processes , we can mark up / edit the diagram to establish a better ,   more intuitive flow . Once the interviews / design sessions are complete , this data can be   aggregated and analyzed . Commonalities in the data patterns will allow us to create software   workflow solutions that will work across the groups and regions . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Learning Launch 

 Challenge   I am a UX / UI Lead for a large energy company . I create workflows and interfaces for engineers   to work more efficiently and effectively . The goal of many of my projects is to redesign an   outdated software interface to make it more intuitive for new engineers . The challenge is that   engineers approach project design differently , depending on the region of the world .     Selection   I use the Learning Launch approach because , given the broad scope and design variables , it   allows me to ideate and test various interface designs with engineers . By watching them use   these quick prototypes , I can quickly iterate to find a solution that will work well for all users .     Application   As with all Design Thinking processes , it is important to start with a definitive goal in mind and a   deep understanding of the audience . Once the business requirements / goals are determined , the   process begins .     When selecting the users for this research , I select 10 - 20 engineers who represent the largest   office regions . Recorded remote interviews and observations regarding the current interface and   expectations help to uncover insights that ca n’t be found using purely survey and analytical   data . I start by asking questions regarding their experience with the software , what they   currently like and dislike about the software , and their background . I then ask them to perform   6 - 8 primary software tasks and have them use think - aloud protocol to describe why they are   making certain decisions as they step through the tasks . I follow this series of tests with a   post - test debriefing , asking what they found confusing , what could be better , and if there are   features they ’d like to add or remove . I subsequently send them an SUS ( System Usability   Scale ) survey regarding their experience to get an analytical baseline for usability and a few   follow up questions .     Next , ideation takes place based on insights found from observations and interviews . This   usually occurs as a series of mind mapping / whiteboarding / post - it note sessions with my team .   By clustering many of the observations , we are able to determine the primary user pain points   across regions and platforms . We are often able to simplify how a certain software process   currently works by eliminating several steps that users found unhelpful or unnecessary .     From here , I create a quick prototype that focuses on functionality and test it with the same set   of users . If they find the new workflow / update meets the goals that we set out to accomplish ,   then the prototype is tested with a larger group of engineers before going into actual production   and development . If the prototype does not meet the goals , needs and expectations of the   project and the users , another prototype will be created and tested . If the prototype does test   well with the larger audience , then a full design / development / user testing plan is put into place . 

 Insight   What I learn from performing this method of design thinking is that allowing the users to interact   with quick prototypes prior to full development allows for much more truthful feedback than with   a survey . It also leads to much better results than simply interviewing and proceeding with what   our team feels is right . By allowing the users to interact with a prototype and get their real - time   feedback on the system , we are able to take a fairly accurate glimpse of the future state of the   software without having to invest much time or money .     Approach   An alternative approach to this challenge would be Visualization / Visual Thinking . By working   with the engineers in groups of stakeholders , as well as individually , and starting with a workflow   diagram of current software processes , we can mark up / edit the diagram to establish a better ,   more intuitive flow . Once the interviews / design sessions are complete , this data can be   aggregated and analyzed . Commonalities in the data patterns will allow us to create software   workflow solutions that will work across the groups and regions .
### Output: 