MINOR PROJECT [ TASK 1 ]
20.04.26 - 24.05.26 / Week 1 - Week 5
Bachelor of Design (Hons) in Creative Media / MINOR PROJECT / Taylor's University
Task 1
OUTLINE
Instruction
Feedback
- WEEK 2
- WEEK 3
- WEEK 4
- WEEK 5
- WEEK 2
- WEEK 3
- WEEK 4
- WEEK 5
Reflection
INSTRUCTION
Module Information Booklet (MIB) of Minor Project
<iframe src="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zfO9-6FuAuAEy51UCAccnRPt-bIEiEXt/preview" width="640" height="480"></iframe>
WEEK 2
WEEK 3
WEEK 4
WEEK 5
Task 1
The first assignment required us to document our entire design process in Figma while working as a team to address a problem provided by one of the clients introduced by the lecturer.
.png) |
| Fig. 1.3 Process 1 (Week 2 / 4.5.2026) |
Our chosen project topic was Smart Halal Ingredient Analyser. To better understand the problem and users’ needs, we conducted interviews with 7 participants. Our target participant criteria included Malaysian Muslim consumers and Malaysian Muslim international travellers.
.png) |
| Fig. 1.4 Process 2 (Week 3 / 10.5.2026) |
Although the interviews needed to be conducted with Malaysian participants, I did not personally know anyone who met the required criteria. Therefore, one of my teammates helped by connecting me with a suitable interview participant.
Fig. 1.5 Traveller interview script (Week 3 / 10.5.2026)
.png) |
| Fig. 1.6 Process 3 (Week 4 / 11.5.2026) |
My responsibilities included editing the interview recording, transcribing the participant’s responses, and organising important keywords and statements from the interview onto Figma sticky notes. These notes were later grouped and analysed to identify patterns and recurring themes within the research data.
.png) |
| Fig. 1.7 Process 4 (Week 4 / 11.5.2026) |
During the project, we received feedback from the lecturer regarding several issues that needed improvement. One of the revisions involved obtaining and properly submitting participant consent forms. Although the consent form had already been collected from the interviewee, it had not been uploaded to the shared group folder, so I ensured that it was added and properly documented.
.png) |
| Fig. 1.8 Process 5 (Week 4 / 17.5.2026) |
.png) |
| Fig. 1.9 Process 6 (Week 5 / 18.5.2026) |
Afterwards, based on the lecturer’s guidance and the Design Thinking process introduced in class, my teammates and I collaboratively developed the Affinity Diagram, Key Findings, Problem Statement, and How Might We Statement in Figma. These activities helped us synthesise the interview data and define a clearer design direction.
.png) |
| Fig. 1.10 Process 7 (Week 5 / 20.5.2026) |
.png) |
| Fig. 1.11 Process 8 (Week 5 / 21.5.2026) |
In addition, the project also required a presentation. As a team, we transformed the content developed in Figma into presentation slides, organising our research findings, user insights, and proposed design direction into a more structured format for presentation and review.
Final Task 1: Group Project Proposal
..
FEEDBACK
WEEK 2
Specific Feedback: The lecturer advised the team to focus on uncovering real user pain points rather than collecting general opinions. The interview questions were refined to elicit more detailed responses on travel challenges, user behaviours, and unmet needs to inform the design process.
General Feedback: The lecturer emphasised the importance of conducting user interviews with well-structured, open-ended questions that encourage participants to share detailed experiences. Students were advised to focus on understanding users’ real needs, behaviours, motivations, and pain points rather than making assumptions. The feedback also highlighted the need to gather meaningful insights that could support and inform the design direction throughout the project.
WEEK 3
Specific Feedback: Each team member was required to conduct at least one interview with a participant who met the target user criteria. The lecturer emphasised the importance of collecting first-hand user data rather than relying solely on secondary research.
General Feedback: For every target user category, at least three interview participants were required. Since the project involved two user groups, the team was advised to recruit a minimum of six participants in total to ensure sufficient and balanced research data.
WEEK 4
Specific Feedback: All team members were instructed to complete interview transcripts, identify key points from each interview, and consolidate the findings into a shared research document. The lecturer emphasised the importance of highlighting meaningful insights from the interview data.
General Feedback: The lecturer recommended completing Task 1 by the following week to maintain progress and ensure enough time for the next stages of the design process.
WEEK 5
Specific Feedback: The lecturer clarified that interview analysis should not focus solely on collecting keywords. Instead, the team was encouraged to interpret the interview data more deeply and identify meaningful patterns, behaviours, and user insights.
General Feedback: The lecturer emphasised the importance of understanding the current stage of the Design Thinking process. At this point, the project had entered the Define stage, where the focus should be on identifying and clearly defining the core problem that needs to be solved.
REFLECTION
Experience
During this project, I participated in user research for the Smart Halal Ingredient Analyser. I conducted and documented an interview with a target participant, transcribed the responses, and organised important keywords and statements using Figma sticky notes. I also collaborated with my teammates to create the Affinity Diagram, Key Findings, Problem Statement, and How Might We statement. In addition, I helped prepare the presentation slides by transferring and organising our research findings from Figma into a presentation format.
Observations
Through the interviews, I observed that many Muslim consumers and Muslim international travelers faced uncertainty when checking whether ingredients were halal, especially when products contained unfamiliar terms or were purchased in non-Muslim countries. I also noticed that users often relied on multiple sources, such as online searches or community recommendations, which could be time-consuming and inconsistent. During the research process, I realized that properly organizing interview data was essential for identifying common patterns and user needs.
Findings
This project taught me the importance of conducting user-centred research before developing a solution. I learned that assumptions can easily lead to incorrect conclusions, while direct interviews provide valuable insights into users’ actual needs and challenges. I also gained experience in qualitative data analysis, including affinity mapping and identifying key findings from interview data. Overall, I developed a better understanding of how research findings can be translated into problem statements and design opportunities.
QUICK LINKS
Projects
Comments
Post a Comment