Onderzoeksvoorstel 1

P a g e 1 | 71
P a g e 2 | 71
P a g e 3 | 71
P a g e 4 | 71
P a g e 5 | 71
FRAMEWORK
This bachelor thesis is realized in response to a principle named Tuan Anh Nguyen who is a co-founder of Sustainable
Buildings B.V. The company is a start-up in Groningen founded by another co-founder Faris Nizamic who both are
specialized in making smart buildings more sustainable. Sustainable Buildings B.V. provides an Internet of Things (IoT)
energy management system that tracks electricity, gas, well known as energy consumption in real time. The management
dashboard shows data in different forms and different views (hourly, daily, monthly, etcetera) (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.).
Visualization of energy consumption data is important too because many workers make little effort to understand energy
consumption behaviour (Shrouf & Miragliotta, 2015).
Management dashboard and public dashboard are the main products provided by Sustainable Buildings B.V. Management
dashboard monitors multiple buildings from one dashboard which can be accessed anywhere on any device. Public
dashboards give real-time feedback to increase awareness and involvement of building users in energy saving. Sustainable
Buildings B.V. would like to increase the usability of the public dashboards. Five of their customers have been gathered to
participate in this bachelor research: town government of Groningen, Vlagtwedde, Hoogeveen, Tynaarlo and engineering
office for the built government Archipunt Groningen. The reason they gathered them, because they know their clients and
if they are using public dashboards actively. The customers are chosen because they are using public dashboards, they are
active users, enthusiastic and they want to give honest input to improve the public dashboards.
This research will be conducted according to the Design Thinking process, and it is chosen because the order of the research
matches the steps of the Design Thinking process. The first step is gaining an understanding of the users, their needs by
doing interviews. During the second step, define phase, all the collected information is put together. This will be done by
creating a Point of View (POV). The user, needs and insights will be combined with each other to formulate the correct
problem statement for each customer. The third step, ideate phase, is done by a brainstorm and ideation session to create
solutions and ideas for the public dashboards. Step four, Prototyping will be done during the brainstorm session and step
five will be done with A/B testing and a survey evaluation. Based on this, an advice to the company of Sustainable Buildings
B.V. will be given which includes a program requirement for each customer based on the research results.
The founders of Sustainable Buildings got an idea for their software system by looking at energy usage of the University of
Groningen building (Bernoulliborg). This includes lights that are left on when nobody is around or computers that stay on
during the weekend. Both Nizamic and Nguyen were Doctor of Philosophy and did research at the University of Groningen
building during their studies to develop the IoT energy management system. Public dashboards are showing energy
consumption in a building so people’s awareness would be increasing.
Nowadays, people spend about ninety percent of their time indoors because buildings have become much more than just
four walls. Buildings are places where people learn, meet people who are inspiring, where ideas are born, and where people
live up to their ambitions. Buildings are places where people spend time with people they care about, but buildings are also
our `home` and there is no place in the world that is more special (Siemens Netherlands, 2018). For this reason, the building
users are called residents in this research.
P a g e 6 | 71
P a g e 7 | 71
ABSTRACT
The climate is changing because the temperature on earth is increasing. Buildings are responsible for 36 percent of national
CO2 emissions, according to figures from the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands and the Ministry. Half of that
comes from office buildings. Therefore, it is a problem that energy consumption is not always something people think about
when they are in or leaving an (office) building.
The public dashboard is of the main products of Sustainable Buildings B.V. that shows information of energy in a building
to make people more aware of the energy consumption or production which should support reducing the energy
consumption to make more buildings in the world a more sustainable and more energy-efficient place. To help the energy
transition to become energy-neutral by 2050, it is important to engage residents of buildings with the sustainability of their
building by being aware of energy consumption. Janda (2011) explains that buildings do not use energy, but people do. For
that reason, the public dashboards must meet the user needs of the residents to match the content and layout to reduce
the CO2 emissions and energy consumption as well.
The research purpose is to find out the user needs and what kind of information the users want to see on the public
dashboards and what this information should be communicated based on the purpose of the dashboard. The components
regarding public dashboard services are user needs, purposes of the dashboards, content, layout and visual design. These
components are established based on the ‘Elements of User Experience’ model by Garrett (2011). The following research
question and sub-questions are drafted:
In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting

residents with sustainability of their buildings?
I. How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

II. What kind of information do the users need for them to understand the content?
III. How can the public dashboards be designed to match the knowledge, ability and desire of the users?
To answer the research questions the sub-questions are drafted. The first sub-question “How are the users experiencing the
current public dashboards?” This question will be answered by interviews to provide as much information as possible about
the problems and needs customers are having in their buildings and the underlying needs and purpose(s) why they are using
the public dashboards. Based on the inputs from the interviews, the improvements for the public dashboard services are
being made. The second sub-question “What kind of information do the users need for them to understand the content?” This
question will be answered by the brainstorm and ideation session with the customers to create many ideas and solutions.
The improvements of the dashboards will be expanded to have enough input for the A/B testing. The third question “How
can the public dashboards be designed to match what the users can, want to do and their knowledge?” This question will be
answered by A/B testing to test the ideas with the customers with some small changes and giving them the opportunity to
choose between two versions of the public dashboards each time with an evaluation. After the A/B testing, a short survey
will be provided to evaluate the choices that have been made. Based on this, an advice to the company of Sustainable
Buildings B.V. will be given which includes a program requirement for each customer based on the research results as well
as new designs of the public dashboard services.
P a g e 8 | 71
P a g e 9 | 71
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Framework .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 13
1.1. Public dashboard services .................................................................................................................................. 14
1.2. Human Technology models ............................................................................................................................... 15
1.2.1. Model of ‘Elements of User Experience’ by Garrett (2011) .......................................................................... 15
1.2.2. User Experience Honeycomb By Morville (2004) ........................................................................................ 16
1.2.3. Usability heuristics by Nielsen (1995) ......................................................................................................... 16
1.2.4. Gebruikskompas ‘use compass’ by Valkenburg (2008) ............................................................................... 16
1.3. Substantiation of choice methodologies ............................................................................................................ 16
1.4. Components ...................................................................................................................................................... 17
1.4.1. User needs ................................................................................................................................................. 17
1.4.2. Purposes .................................................................................................................................................... 22
1.4.3. Content ..................................................................................................................................................... 23
1.4.4. Layout ....................................................................................................................................................... 24
1.4.5. Visual design .............................................................................................................................................. 25
1.5. Research aims.................................................................................................................................................... 28
2. Methods ..................................................................................................................................................................... 31
2.1. Layers of the ‘Elements of User Experience’....................................................................................................... 32
2.1.1. Strategy plane ........................................................................................................................................... 33
2.1.2. Scope plane ............................................................................................................................................... 33
2.1.3. Structure plane .......................................................................................................................................... 33
2.1.4. Skeleton plane ........................................................................................................................................... 34
2.1.5. Surface plane ............................................................................................................................................. 34
2.2. Part 1: Research ................................................................................................................................................. 35
2.2.1. Interviews .................................................................................................................................................. 35
2.2.2. Brainstorm and Ideation session ................................................................................................................ 36
2.3. Part 2: Visual design........................................................................................................................................... 38
2.3.1. A/B testing ................................................................................................................................................. 38
2.3.2. Survey evaluation ...................................................................................................................................... 39
2.3.3. Personages ................................................................................................................................................ 39
3. Expected results ......................................................................................................................................................... 41
Part 1: research .............................................................................................................................................................. 41
3.1.1. User interviews .............................................................................................................................................. 41
3.1.2. Brainstorm and Ideation session ................................................................................................................ 41
P a g e 10 | 71
Part 2: Visual design ....................................................................................................................................................... 41

3.1.3. A/B testing ..................................................................................................................................................... 41
3.1.4. Survey/evaluation ...................................................................................................................................... 41
4. Discussion .................................................................................................................................................................. 43
List of figures ..................................................................................................................................................................... 45
List of tables ...................................................................................................................................................................... 45
References ......................................................................................................................................................................... 47
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................................ 49
Appendix 1: Operationalization ...................................................................................................................................... 49
Appendix 2: Extensive conceptual model ....................................................................................................................... 51
Appendix 3: Current public dashboard services .............................................................................................................. 52
Appendix 4: Energy transition planning 2008-2050 ........................................................................................................ 61
Appendix 5: Human Technology models ........................................................................................................................ 62
5.1: Elements of User Experience by Garret (2011) ..................................................................................................... 62
5.2 User experience honeycomb by Morville (2004).................................................................................................... 63
5.3: Ten usability heuristics by Nielsen (1995) ............................................................................................................. 64
5.4: Use compass by Valkenburg (2008) ..................................................................................................................... 66
Appendix 6: measurement instruments (in Dutch) ......................................................................................................... 67
6.1: Interviews questions (with the people who are involved with energy and the public dashboards) ........................ 67
6.2: Brainstorm session PowerPoint ........................................................................................................................... 69
6.3: Point of View ....................................................................................................................................................... 71
P a g e 11 | 71
P a g e 12 | 71
P a g e 13 | 71
1. INTRODUCTION
“Buildings do not use energy – people do”
The climate is changing because the temperature on earth is increasing. This is because more and more greenhouse gases
such as CO2 are coming into the air. Scientists agree that humans are mainly responsible for global warming. Rising
temperature has consequences for the climate: that is changing. Controlling the consequences is possible if the increase of
the temperature is limited from 1,5 to 2 degrees Celsius. This is only possible if the global CO2 emissions are reduced in
2050. This requires substantial measures. Paris Agreement was adopted on 12 December 2015 at the twenty-first session of
the Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Paris from
November 30th, 2018 to December 13th, 2015. The Netherlands agreed on 28 July 2017. The Paris Agreement’s central aim
is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well
below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to
1.5 degrees Celsius. Additionally, the agreement aims to increase the ability of countries to deal with the impacts of climate
change.
The IPCC (the United Nations (UN) climate panel where thousands of scientists from all over the world cooperate) is clear:
human beings are the main cause of global warming. Global warming has multiple consequences: food shortages in areas
where it becomes drier is a result of hunger and malnutrition. There is a chance of more and longer heat waves. This is
primarily a risk for the elderly and other vulnerable groups. Especially poor, tropical areas will suffer from climate change.
Densely populated areas in poor countries are vulnerable because they do not have the money and technology to adapt to
climate change. The Netherlands is getting warmer as well and the sea level is increasing, but the consequences are likely
to be controlled. Energy saving is effective, using economical devices, choosing sustainable sources of energy such as solar
panels or heat pumps and environmentally conscious food are solutions to combat climate change. A paper called “buildings
don’t use energy: people do” by Kathryn B. Janda discusses that building users play a critical but poorly understood and
often overtook role in the built environment. People and groups are responsible for all energy use. Personal actions of
individuals account for around half of the energy consumption across all sectors while institutional (or non-personal) choices
account for the other half. Buildings and technologies may enable or constrain the energy implications of these choices, but
the choices themselves are fundamentally important (Janda, 2011). Buildings are responsible for approximately 40% of
energy consumption in the European Union (European Commission, 2018).
Nonetheless, most people do not know the amount of used energy consumption in an (office) building, including leaving
computers on, lights or other devices. This problem does not only occur in the Netherlands but also worldwide, and not only
in office buildings but also at homes for example. People can only change this problem, not the buildings because the
building does not use energy, people do (Janda, 2011). A report of “Carbon Majors Report” of the “Carbon Disclosure
Project” describes that no less than 71 percent of CO2 emissions can be attributed to a group of 100 polluting companies. A
relatively small group is responsible for a large proportion of the greenhouse gas emissions. Only 25 of them (including Shell)
contribute more than half to the global share (Visser, 2018). According to researchers, the European Union must reduce
CO2 emissions by 12 percent a year to reach the Paris Agreement. The current decrease is only 0.4 percent (van Santen,
2017). For many companies, it is difficult to consistently reduce a few percent annually of their energy consumption (MVO
Nederland, 2017). Sustainable Buildings B.V. developed public dashboards for their clients to solve this current problem or
their need(s). The following research question will be answered:
In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting residents

with sustainability of their buildings?
Components relative to public dashboards services based on the ‘Elements of User Experience’ by Garret (2011) are user
needs, purposes (of the public dashboards), content, layout and visual design. The components are determined with the model
of Garrett (2011) and the operationalization (see Appendix 1).
P a g e 14 | 71
1.1. PUBLIC DASHBOARD SERVICES

Public dashboards show real-time data from one certain
building to let building users know how much energy is
consumed. Figure 1 shows an example of a public
dashboard. Monitoring building’s energy usage for
maximum efficiency means checking and updating energy
consumption on a regular basis to ensure energy is not
getting wasted. Adjusting a building’s operational timing
could create a huge difference in the energy bill. It is
unnecessary to heat or cool a building to levels that are
optimal for employees comfort during non-business hours
(WikiHow, 2016). Public dashboards show energy
consumption to let people know how much it will cost or in
comparison with other subjects, for example: with
households, lights, etcetera. The usability will increase if
the designs of the dashboards meet the user needs. There
are different ways to show energy on a dashboard. To make
people aware of energy consumption, the information
should be understandable for all kind of different users. For FIGURE 1: AN EXAMPLE OF THE PUBLIC DASHBOARD (ABOUT GAS
example, not everyone knows the meaning of kWh or m3 CONSUMPTION. SOURCE: SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS (N.D.) RETRIEVED
(cubic meters). The term kWh is the abbreviation of a SEPTEMBER 7TH, 2018, FROM HTTPS://SUSTAINABLEBUILDINGS.NL
kilowatt-hour (the h comes from English: hour). One

kilowatt-hour represents the consumption of 1,000 watts
for 1 hour. As shown on the figure on the right (see Figure
1), it says the gas consumption is 114.3 cubic meters (m3).
Joule is the official unit according to the International System of Units to measure energy. Kilowatt-hour is the unit derived
from the joule via the watt. It is only used for electrical energy (Essent, 2018). One kilowatt-hour is 1000 watts, and 1 watt is
1 joule per second. Officially, power consumption should be indicated in joules. However, one joule is a small amount of
energy. If electricity consumption is measured in joules, it would be a huge number. Therefore, energy is indicated in
kilowatt-hour. One kWh is 1000 watts multiplied by 3,600 seconds is 3.6 million joules (Essent, 2018). This amount of
numbers would be even more confusing for users. An explanation could already help. Table 1 shows units that are currently
used on the public dashboards.
TABLE 1: EXAMPLES OF UNITS USED ON THE PUBLIC DASHBOARDS
kWh Kilowatt-hour PPM Parts per million

M3 Cubic meters CO2 Carbon dioxide
Appendix 3 shows the various designs of the all current public dashboards.
Public dashboard services could be classified into different categories. This bachelor thesis is carried out to increase the
usability of the public dashboards. The specifications of user requirements and needs are going to be gathered to make
people more aware of energy consumption. The process of developing public dashboards is a process of User Experience
(UX).
Creating an engaging, efficient user experience is called user-centred design. If users are not having a positive user
experience, they will not use the product (Garrett, 2011). Jesse James Garret describes in his book five planes to provide a
positive user experience for end users. This is visually shown in a five layers model – strategy, scope, structure, skeleton and
P a g e 15 | 71
surface – which is shown in figure 2. Each plane is dependent on the planes below it. The choices available on each plane are
constrained by the decisions made about issues on the planes below it (Garrett, 2011).
1.2. HUMAN TECHNOLOGY MODELS

1.2.1. MODEL OF ‘E LEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE ’ BY GARRETT (2011)
The components relating to this research – also the sub-questions that are drafted based on the operationalization, are
linked with the elements of User Experience of Garrett (2011). The components are user needs, purposes (of the public
dashboards), content, layout and visual design. On each plane, the issues become less abstract and more concrete. On the
lowest plane, there is no concern about the final shape of the product, the only responsibility is about how the product will
fit into the strategy (while meeting the needs of the users). On the highest plane, the only concern is with the most concrete
details of the appearance of the product. Plane by plane, the upcoming decisions become more specific and involve finer
levels of details. By breaking down each plane into components elements, it provides a closer look at how all pieces fit
together of designing the whole user experience. The functionalities side (left side) of the model is mainly about tasks, the
steps involved in a process and how people think about completing them. The information side of the model concerns the
information that the product offers and what it means for users. Enable users to search, absorb and make sense; creating
an information-rich user experience with the provided information.
Appendix 5.1. shows an explanation of the model with the elements.
In the strategy plane, the same strategic concerns are both

part of functionality-oriented products and information-
oriented resources. User needs are the goals that come from
outside the organizations – specifically from the people who
are using the public dashboards. Understanding what the
audience wants and how that fits in with other goals they
have. User needs balances against our own objectives for the
product, these are called product objectives. The product
objectives are coming from inside the organization. In the
scope plane on the functional side, the strategy is translated
into scope through the creation of functional specifications:
“a detailed description of the ‘feature set’ of the product”. On
the information side, scope takes the form of content
requirements: “a description of the various content elements
that will be required”. The scope is given structure on the
functionality side of the structure plane through interaction
design. For information resources, the structure is the
information architecture: “the arrangement of content
elements to facilitate human understanding”. The skeleton
plane breaks down into three components. On both sides,
the information design is addressed: “the presentation of
information in a way that facilities understand”. For
functionality-oriented products, the plane also includes
interface design. The interface for an information resource is
navigation design: “the set of screen elements that allow the
users to move through the information architecture”. Finally,
there is the surface plane. The sensory experience created
FIGURE 2: ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE BY GARRETT (2011)
by the finished product is both concerning functionality-
oriented and information resources (Garrett, 2011).
P a g e 16 | 71
1.2.2. USER EXPERIENCE HONEYCOMB BY MORVILLE (2004)

Peter Morville summarizes the concept of UX (2004) with
seven components. Useful, usable, findable, credible,
accessible, desirable & valuable. This model is based on the
model of Garrett (2011). The User Experience Honeycomb
(2004) does not show a process of steps to achieve a good
user experience but shows what need to be considered
when using a user experience.
Appendix 5.2 shows the model with the explanations

of the components of Morville (2004).
“Businesses have now come to recognize that

providing a quality user experience is an essential,
sustainable competitive advantage. It is user
experience that forms the customer’s impression of
the company’s offerings, it is user experience that
differentiates the company from its competitors
and it is user experience that determines whether
your customer will ever come back.”
FIGURE 3: USER EXPERIENCE (UX) HONEYCOMB BY MORVILLE (2004)
The elements of User Experience by Jesse James Garrett (Garrett,
2011)
1.2.3. USABILITY HEURISTICS BY NIELSEN (1995)

The heuristics of Jakob Nielsen (1995) are used for the evaluation of the newly designed public dashboards. There are ten
general principles by Nielsen used for interaction design of a product. They are called "heuristics" because they are broad
rules of thumb and not specific usability guidelines (Nielsen, 1995). They are used to evaluate the new designs of the public
dashboard in the visual design phase of this research.
The ten usability heuristics can be found in Appendix 5.3.
1.2.4. GEBRUIKSKOMPAS ‘USE COMPASS’ BY VALKENBURG (2008)

The use compass describes the knowledge, ability and desire of the user in relation to the product. The method comes from
the book ‘Human Technology Interaction’ (Valkenburg, R., Vos-Vlamings, M., Bouma, J., Willems, 2008). The use compass
consists of three groups of four factors each. Physical and sensory properties of users determine whether a product can be
used properly. By drawing lines between the dots, it becomes clear where the improvements can be found. In the theoretical
framework in chapter 2, the factors are explained extensively (Specken, 2013a). The three main groups are want/desire
(willen in Dutch), can/ability (kunnen in Dutch) and know/knowledge (kennen in Dutch) as shown in Appendix 5.4.
Appendix 5.4 shows the model (Valkenburg, 2008) and describes the questions that belong to the factors.
1.3. SUBSTANTIATION OF CHOICE METHODOLOGIES

The “Elements of user experience” model by Garrett (2011) shows a clear process to achieve a positive user experience. By
dividing the user experience into different elements and looking at them from different angles, it can be assumed that all
elements have been taken into consideration and that all decisions that have been made can be substantiated. The usability
heuristics (1995) by Jakob Nielsen is used for visual design. These broad rules of thumb are used to evaluate the new designs
of the public dashboards as well as the use compass (2008) by Valkenburg during a survey after the A/B testing. The User
Experience Honeycomb (2004) by Morville is used to know what needs to be considered when creating a user experience,
which mostly corresponds to the factors of the use compass.
P a g e 17 | 71
1.4. COMPONENTS
Public dashboards must meet several components to create a positive user experience. Therefore, the components of this
research are user needs, purposes (of the public dashboards), content, layout and visual design. The research will be executed
in the order of the components. The first component that needs to be specified is the user needs. The user needs are the
goals that come from outside the organization – specifically from the people who (will) using the product – the public
dashboards. Product objectives (Garrett, 2011) are coming from inside the organization. Interviews with customers give
insights of the user needs of what they want and how that fits in with others goals they have. The second component is the
purposes (of the public dashboards). This is the functional specifications as well as the content requirements of the scope
plane of the ‘Elements of User Experience’ model. The Third component is content. The content is the information on the
public dashboards that is understandable for every type of user. In the ‘Elements of User Experience’ model, it is called
information architecture. The fourth component is the layout. The purposes are determined based on the user needs which
establish the content. Which all these three elements are determined, the content needs a layout. When all four
components are completed, the visual design will have the finishing touch of the public dashboards.
1.4.1. USER NEEDS

Defining the strategy can be answered by two questions. The first question is: “what do we want to get out of this product?”
and the second question is: “what do the users want to get out of it?” (Garrett, 2011).
By answering the first question, the product objectives are described. The second question address the user needs. Together,
product objectives and user needs form the strategy plane, the foundation for every decision in the process of designing the
user experience. The more clearly the organization articulate what they want and exactly what others want from them, the
more precisely the choices can be adjusted to meet these goals. Product objectives for products start out in general terms:
to make the company money or to save money the company money. Sometimes it is both. Requirements of the company
are:
TABLE 2: PRODUCT OBJECTIVES FROM INSIDE THE ORGANIZATION
Efficiency: reducing energy consumption
Public dashboards must increase awareness

The public dashboards must show something that users will understand
The content of the public dashboards must tell a story without explanation needed
Feedback from the users should be collected about how they should work and look
P a g e 18 | 71
Multiple users are involved in energy transition, including authorities, municipality of Groningen, companies and customers
of Sustainable Buildings B.V. Experts in UX could also be a part of energy transition.
1.4.1.1. A UTHORITIES
Nearly 5.5 percent of the energy used in the Netherlands came from renewable sources in 2014. The European average is
sixteen percent (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2016). Importantly is maintaining energy consumption minimized, for
example: reduce the heating, shower slightly shorter and hang up the laundry (Wattisduurzam.nl, 2018). In 2016, 5.9 percent
of the total energy consumption in the Netherlands consisted of energy obtained from sustainable sources, according to
figures from Statistics Netherlands (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek; CBS, 2017). This energy consumption consists of
electricity, heat and transport. Twelve percent of green energy used in the Netherlands is coming from our country, and the
remaining percentage is from green energy sources abroad. In 2016, according to research conducted by the Economic
Institute for Construction and Housing (Economisch Instituut voor de Bouw; EIB) in cooperation with the Energy Research
Centre of the Netherlands (Energieonderzoek Centrum Nederland; ECN), approximately 52 percent of the total office stock
in the Netherlands needs to be upgraded from the existing energy label to meet the requirements of an energy label C in
2023. Most of the energy labels are registered in the larger municipalities in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague with an
average energy label of D.
Appendix 4 shows the energy transition planning from 2008 until 2050 of the Netherlands.
1.4.1.2. C OMPANIES
Office buildings will be required to have an energy label of C or better from 2023, meaning that the use of office buildings
with a D energy label rating or lower will be illegal. It is estimated that more than half of the offices in the Netherlands must
take measures to meet this upcoming obligation. The Netherlands will not achieve the goal of generating energy
requirements sustainably of 14 percent by 2020. This is evidence from the National Energy Outlook (In Dutch: Nationale
Energieverkenning; NEV), 12,4 percent is achievable (H. van Santen, E. van der Walle, 2017). Energy labels show an
appliance ranks on a scale from A to G according to its energy consumption. Class A(green) is the most efficient and Class
G (red) is the least efficient. Energy labels enable customers to choose products that consume less energy and thereby save
money. Labels can also encourage companies to develop and invest in energy-efficient product design.
1.4.1.3. M UNICIPALITY OF G RONINGEN

The city of Groningen wants to be energy-neutral by 2035. Energy-neutral means if all energy used in the city is generated
sustainably. To measure these plans, the energy monitors have been developed. As Groningen Gives Energy (Groningen
Geeft Energie), most of the major energy consumers in the city now participating in this energy monitor. Sustainable
Buildings B.V. is a partner participating in the Groningen Energy Neutral Platform (Platform Groningen Energieneutraal)
(Groningen Energieneturaal, 2018). The Groningen approach to the energy transition in an example for other European
cities, according to the European Commission. The recognition provides Groningen with a subsidy of 7.6 million euros to
further expand its leading position and to demonstrate it to the rest of Europe. The municipality, the business community,
knowledge institutions, housing corporations and residents will work together to make the neighbourhood of the future
with energy-generating buildings and smart ICT applications. The municipality of Groningen, the Hanze University of
Applied Sciences, University of Groningen (RuG), Grunneger Power, The New Energy Coalition, Neijstee, TNO, Waarborg
vastgoed, CGI Nederland and Sustainable Buildings B.V. are members of the Groningen project that starts on December 1st
and lasts for about five years.
P a g e 19 | 71
1.4.1.4. C USTOMERS OF S USTAINABLE B UILDINGS B.V.

Town government Groningen at location Gedempte Zuiderdiep suggested desired features for the public dashboard
services: This is previous gathered input before the research started. The public dashboard should be more interactive and
entertaining, to keep attracting the attention of building visitors. There should also be more suggested content. For
example tips and interesting photos and then choose the content wanted to be in use. General content such as new (from
nu.nl) or weather forecast (from buienradar.nl) is suggested. The possibility to be able to decide the order of appearance of
slides, including other sources of content as well (nu.nl) is valuable. Even better would be organizing the content (news and
tips) each month, so each month there is another set of content being shown. The current public dashboards are too
technical for the town government of Groningen, the information is understandable and is not much in use. “At the
moment, the shown data on the dashboard is very technical. It should be more readable and understandable by any user in
the building. For example, it would be interesting to show a comparison of consumption this and last year or show which
energy savings actions are taking in this or previous period”.
“Sustainable Buildings helps us make our employees and our citizens more a ware of energy consumption and
what they can do to save energy. We find that to be the first step towards making our buildings energy neutral
by 2035”.
Peter Petersen – GrESCo, Municipality of Groningen (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.)
“With a random mix of consuming electrical devices & energy dashboard of Sustainable Buildings in the science
exhibition RE: charge, we make our visitors aware of their personal energy consumption in their daily lives with
impact on the process of energy transition”.
Ingeborg Veldman – Project leader Science LinX, science center University of Groningen (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.)
“Working together with Sustainable Buildings start-up, helped our university to become the most sustainable
university in the Netherlands”.
Dick Jager – RuG, Sustainability manager (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.)
1.4.1.5. E XPERTS
S TEVE K RUG (2005)
Steve Krug explains in his book ‘don’t make me think’ that people do not read pages but scan them. Why are people
scanning? Krug says that people are usually in a hurry. People do not have the time to read more than necessary (Krug,
2005). This is especially also the case with the public dashboards. People usually do not stand still to read the pages of the
dashboards. People are mainly in a hurry and want to absorb the information in a couple of seconds. “In the last few years,
making things more usable has become almost everybody’s responsibility.
Visual designers and developers now often find themselves doing things like interaction design (deciding what happens next
when the user clicks, taps, or swipes) and information architecture (figuring out how everything should be organized).” Krug
explains his definition of usability: “After all, usability really just means that making sure that something works well: that a
person of average (or even below average ability and experience can use the thing - whether it's a website, a fighter jet, or a
revolving door - for its intended purpose without getting hopelessly frustrated” (Steve Krug, don’t make me think (2000), p.5).
“I should be able to “get it” – what it is and how to use it – without expending any effort thinking about it”.
Steve Krug; author of the book ‘don’t make me think’

P a g e 20 | 71
J AKOB N IELSEN (1995)

Nielsen (1995) tried to objectively evaluate the user experience on digital platforms with his heuristic evaluation. Though
they date back to the ‘90s, these general rules are still valid and are used today. The first heuristic is: “Visibility of system
status”. This principle states that the user should know what is going on inside the system. Feedback needs to be given
within a reasonable time. This feedback is normally associated with points of action and can be provided using a colour
change, loader or time-left graphics for example. An example is Google Drive showing the status of a document upload. The
second heuristic is: “Match between system and the real world”. Is there something that a user may not understand? It is
common to miss since people get associated with the product for over a period of time (Duggirala, 2016). The system should
speak the users’ language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow
real-world conversations, making information appear in a natural and logical order (Nielsen, 1995). The third heuristic is:
“User control and Freedom”. This principle talks about giving the user the freedom to navigate and perform actions. The
freedom to undo any accidental actions. Gmail has an undo action when an email is accidentally deleted (Duggirala, 2016).
Support undo and redo (Nielsen, 1995).
The fourth heuristic is: “Consistency and standards”. Consistency is the key. If data is shown in a particular table format on
one page, it should look the same the next time data is being shown in tabular format (Duggirala, 2016). Users should not
have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing (Nielsen, 1995). The fifth heuristic is
“Error prevention”. A careful design is even better than good error messages which prevent a problem from occurring in
the first place. Check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action. An example
of Google is Google search trying to correct wrong spelling. If some rules are set for the format of the user password, try to
validate it as the user types rather than waiting for the user to click submit (Duggirala, 2016). The sixth heuristic is:
“Recognition rather than recall”. It is always better to suggest the user a set of options than to let them remember and
type the whole thing (Duggirala, 2016). Minimize the users’ memory load by making objects, actions and options visible.
The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the
system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate (Nielsen, 1995).
The seventh heuristic is: “Flexibility and efficiency of use”. The interface should be flexible transforming itself between a
novice user and an advanced user. One frequents this option while installing a new software that asks if the user wants to
go ahead with the default installation or custom installation. An advanced user chooses a custom installation to cut out the
unnecessary service. The eighth heuristic is: “Aesthetic and minimalist design”. Dialogues should not contain information
which is irrelevant or rarely needed (Nielsen, 1995). Prioritization comes to play when this aspect is being considered. For a
designer or developer, the information that is presented on the page is relevant. Perhaps this is not the case for the user. “Is
every information displayed on interface necessary and useful?” Google could be shown as an example of the best possible
minimalist design. Interfaces need to be cleared of unnecessary elements and content that do not support the page goals
and tasks (Duggirala, 2016).
The ninth heuristic is: “Help users recognize, diagnose and recover from errors”. A check needs to be done if exception
handling is done across the application so that relevant messages can be shown to the user. Empty state messaging, 404,
500, etc are some examples (Duggirala, 2016). Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely
indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution (Nielsen, 1995). The tenth and last heuristic is: “Help and
documentation”. Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide
help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to
be carried out, and not be too large (Nielsen, 1995). Duggirala (2016) explains it as follows: if a user has reached this step,
something is not right with the interface. A great user interface lets the user navigate through its features without any
documentation or training. But if there is any user who could not make it out, adequate help should be provided within the
product. Therefore, they are similar.
The usability heuristics can be found in Appendix 5.3.

P a g e 21 | 71
V ALKENBURG (2008); M ARTIN S PECKEN (2013)

People who using websites, application or digital products, trying to achieve personal goals. If that does not work or is
difficult, it results in a negative user experience. Martin Specken invented and explains the method of the use compass. The
first part consists which people want to use the product. Personal needs and goals play an important role. It is often decisive
when making the choice whether to use something and not to continue using it. The following aspects are part of ‘want’:
helpful, desirable, valuable and fun. Participants of a research could indicate to what extent the product has guaranteed
that the goal has been achieved. This can be done on a scale of zero to ten. Buienradar is an application that shows the
weather condition. When cycling to work, this application ensures the goal can be achieved immediately. The application is
therefore useful. To what extent the product is compatible with the personal needs of someone, belongs to desirable. “Does
the product meet the user needs?” The product should be valuable to the user while using it. The concept of value could be
linked to social values. “Does it add value?” Fun is an important factor for people who want to use the product. The
importance is sometimes underestimated by development teams because the focus is too much on their own organization
instead of future users. The extent to which extent the product is fun to use determines whether people want to use the
product more often or not (Specken, 2013a).
The second part consists the extent to which people can use a product. Physical and sensory characteristics play an
important role. Large variations in these characteristics per target group, or even within a target group. The following
aspects are part of ‘can’: useful, accessible, comfortable and simple. An example of ‘useful’ is; when an application does not
fit with the type of smartphone of the user, there is a low usability. The question belongs to useful is “is your target audience
able to use it?” The characteristics of the target audience and the environment are decisive for accessibility. If the text is
difficult to read, this may be due to the size of the letters, a visual limitation of the user or the bright sunlight shining on the
display. A device can also hang too high on the wall for small people(Specken, 2013b). Factor comfortable: to what extent
is it pleasant to use an ICT-product for a long time or more than once? When experiencing the layout and used colours of a
website for example as pleasant, a positive user experience could occur. A clear contrast between the background colour
and texts can also provide a comfortable feeling. Factor simple: “keep it simple” is a motto of Specken in his work.
The third part of the use compass consists of the extent to which a product is connected to the knowledge of the users.
Cognitive characteristics play a major role. The following factors are part of ‘knowledge’: understandable, recognizable,
learnable and discoverable. Factor understandable: names and text should be read by people from the target audience to
see what they do not understand. Factor recognizable: an icon with a house is recognized as a link to the homepage. An icon
with three lines in increasingly used and recognized. Unfortunately, the graphic design, content and interaction do not
match what the user expects in advance.
Processes and realistic photos and videos contribute to more recognisability. Factor learnable: if an audience can use a
product without any effort or required skills, it is the ideal situation. Steve Krug wrote the book ‘don’t make me think’ about
it. Factor findable: IT users think their own stupidity is the reason something cannot be found. The organization is the reason
and should be actively involving the target group in the (re)development (Specken, 2013c). An optimal user experience is
important for people that can use products properly. If there is no connection to the knowledge factor, users will decline. If
people do not want to use the product, the goal of the organization cannot be reached either (Specken, 2013c).
The use compass can be found in Appendix 5.4.
“Keep it simple”
KISS (keep it simple stupid) principle of Steve Krug (2005)

P a g e 22 | 71
1.4.2. PURPOSES
The public dashboards could have different purposes for the customers. One customer could use the public dashboards to
save energy in the building while another customer uses them to increase their public image or be more aware of the energy
consumption. Examples of the public dashboard designs give an impression of what the purpose could be and what kind of
information is shown. Figure 6 shows among other things an example of a so-called converter (on the top, right). A converter
is a public dashboard that shows the energy consumption translated into different data. An assumption is that users will
understand this kind of information more easily. When customers notice that the energy consumption equals 1,532
computers that are on for the whole day, they probably will realize this amount is surprisingly much. The purposes of a public
dashboard such as a converter could be increasing the awareness or realizing the energy consumption. Figure 5 also shows
a graphic of the air concentration (on the top, left). Parts per
million (ppm) means out of a million, just as percent means
out of a hundred. The colours show that it is or good or bad
and users will possibly understand the graphic more than just
showing the numbers. The graphic in figure 6 shows that the
CO2 is 500ppm. An assumption is that probably most people
will not understand this information. However, the graph
makes the information more understandable. De line is still
in the green zone which could be associated with a positive
feeling because the smiley also shows that it is something
good.
Public dashboards not only show the energy that is

consumed but also generated. The energy production is
energy being produced instead of consumed. The energy is
generated by solar panels for example. Figure 6 shows the
solar energy production as well (on the bottom, left). The
comparison makes people more understandable of 687.58
kWh, it equals 1,920 lamps that are on for the whole day and
138 euros total cost of the day which means that the money
is being saved. The last one, on the bottom right, the public
dashboard shows the energy consumption of the whole day.
Each customer has their own purpose for using the public
dashboards in their buildings to solve a problem or need they
are having. There are public dashboards which show
different information. The dashboards can be found in
Appendix 1.
1.4.2.1. E MPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN

SUSTAINABILITY
The engagement of the employees is great value for the
companies especially related to energy. People are using
energy, not buildings (Janda, 2011). To make the users aware
of energy consumption in a building, they are more engaged,
and the chance of changing behaviour is then increasing.
FIGURE 4: EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT CURRENT PUBLIC DASHBOARDS

P a g e 23 | 71
Energy is one of the largest controllable overheads in office buildings

which means there are many opportunities to make savings. Reducing
energy consumption not only saves money but improves working
conditions which can increase staff productivity. Furthermore, the “Did you know? Lighting an
environment will benefit from reductions in energy use and carbon office overnight wastes
emissions which enhances corporate reputation. Employee engagement enough energy to heat water
in energy efficiency and carbon reduction can help change behaviour in for 1,000 cups of tea.”
the workplace, to reduce unnecessary energy consumption and cut your
organisation's carbon emissions (Carbon Trust, 2018). Energy awareness
should become as much a part of the culture of your organisation as
safety, quality and customer care. In addition to awareness campaigns,
this requires wider attention to all the key elements of energy
management. An energy policy is central to this and shows a public
commitment to energy efficiency and the environment. It demonstrates the level of management support for energy
efficiency both within the organisation and outside it. People will respond to different reasons for saving energy, and it also
depends on their position and how long they have been with the organisation. It might also be important to consider the
kind of person they are, and the things they respond to outside of work. Senior management will be motivated by the
business benefits, while other staff are more likely to respond to something which will benefit them directly, such as
reinvesting savings to improve facilities, like the kitchen or common room. (Carbon Trust, 2013). Globally, businesses of all
sizes are beginning to embrace the values of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability. However, most
executives haven't figured out how to engage employees in daily activities that put those values into practice. Engaging
your employees around your organization’s corporate sustainability efforts can help to enhance an employee’s commitment
to their employer and their employer’s efforts. In a 2012 Forbes article, “What is Employee Engagement?” the author writes
that “Employee engagement is the emotional commitment the employee has to the organization and its goals. This
emotional commitment means engaged employees care about their work and their company. They don’t work just for a
paycheck, or just for the next promotion, but work on behalf of the organization’s goals” (Smeltzer, 2018).
1.4.3. CONTENT
The next component is content. It is about what kind of information is needed to understand the content. The data of energy
consumption or production is measured and is translated into information shown on the public dashboards. Before buildings
can become more sustainable and energy efficient, buildings users should become more aware of energy consumption. The
content of the public dashboard is the information visualized to be understandable for the users. Understanding where,
when, and how a building consumes energy is the first step one must take to before renovating, constructing a building, or
addressing the issue of sustainability in an existing building (Haslam, Hearn, Hall, Hebdon, & Joy, n.d.). In an article ‘Energy
management based on Internet of Things: practices and framework for adoption in production management’ from 2015
that is relying on a comprehensive literature review and on experts’ insights, it contributes to the understanding of energy-
efficient production management practices that are enhanced and enabled by the Internet of Things technology. “In today’s
manufacturing scenario, rising energy prices, increasing environmental awareness and changing consumer behaviours are
driving decision-makers to prioritize green manufacturing. The Internet of Things paradigm promises to increase the
visibility and awareness of energy consumption, due to smart sensors and smart meters at the machine and production line
level.
The availability of real-time energy consumption data offers several opportunities to reduce energy consumption by
enabling and enhancing energy-efficient practices in production management”. Visualization of energy consumption data
is important too because many workers make little effort to understand energy consumption behaviour (Shrouf &
Miragliotta, 2015).
P a g e 24 | 71
It is generally believed that our climate is changing, and there is a growing concern about the increase in energy use and its
adverse effects on the environment (Li, Yang, & Lam, 2013). In the building sector, net energy is often referred to a balance
between the energy consumption in a building and the energy produced by its renewable energy systems. A growing
interest in the potential of zero energy buildings (ZEB) to help alleviate the problems concerning the depletion of energy
resources and the deterioration of the environment. Zero energy buildings involve two strategies – minimizing the needs
for energy use in buildings through energy-efficient measures (EEM) and adopting renewable energy and other
technologies (RET) to meet the energy needs (Li et al., 2013).
Content can be determined based on Morville’s Honeycomb (2004). Value is central in the honeycomb model (see figure 3).
“Is the information or functionality valuable to the user?” is the question that belongs to this component. The values are partly
determined by the other components of Morville (2004). A good public dashboard has original content and provides the
useful information. Public dashboards must always be user-friendly. A user-friendly dashboard adapts to the characteristics
of the user’s device. A professional design not only determines the credibility, but also the quality of the content. The
content of the public dashboard determines how the dashboard comes across. The feeling the public dashboard give the
users determines an achievement of a good relationship between the design, the usability and the feeling that the
dashboards convey to the user. If all elements of the dashboards contain enough contrast, it is also accessible to users who
are colour blind for example (Peter Morville, 2004). Findable cannot really be applied to the content component but is more
part of the layout of the public dashboards. This will be discussed in chapter “1.4.4. Layout”. Don’t make me think” is the
first law of usability according to Steve Krug (2005).
Fact of life #1
People spend very little time reading pages. Instead, people scan (or skim) them, looki ng for words or phrases
that catch our eye. Why do people scan?
o We are usually in a hurry. Most of the web use is motivated by the desire to save time. Users have to
keep moving, and there is no time to read any more than necessary.
o We know we do not need to read everything. People mostly are interested in a fraction of what is on a
page. They are looking for the bits that match interests and the rest of it is irrelevant. Scanning is how
people find the relevant bits.
o We are good at it. Newspapers, magazines and books have been scanned in people’s lives to find the
parts they are interested in.
Book: “Don’t make me think” by Steve Krug (Krug, 2005)
1.4.4. LAYOUT
The Structure plane is the third of the five planes of Garrett. This is the point at which concerns shifts from the more abstract
issues of strategy and scope to the concrete factors that will determine what users finally experience. The line between
abstract and concrete can be blurry, although much of what will be decided here will have a noticeable, tangible influence
on the final product. Information architecture deals with the options involved in conveying information to the user. Both
interaction design and information architecture are not about technology, but about understanding people – the way they
behave and think. By building this understanding into the structure of our product, it helps ensure a successful experience
for those who use the public dashboards. For as long as people have had information to convey, they had to make choices
about how they structure that information so other people would understand and use it. Information architecture problems
require creating categorization schemes that will correspond to internal objectives, the user needs to be intended to meet
and the content that will be incorporated.
P a g e 25 | 71
Garrett (2011) suggest two ways of creating a

categorization scheme: from the top down or from the
bottom up. The top-down approach is driven by
considerations from the strategy plane and the bottom-up
approach is driven by considerations from the scope plane.
A top-down approach (see figure 9) involves creating the
architecture directly from an understanding of strategy
plane considerations: product objectives and user needs.
Starting with the broadest categories of possible content
and functionality needed to accomplish these strategic
goals, then breaking down the categories into logical
subsections. A bottom-up approach (see figure 10) also
infers categories and subcategories but based on the
analysis of the content and functional requirements. FIGURE 5: TOP-DOWN ARCHITECTURAL APPROACH
Starting with the source material that exists, items will be
grouped together into low-level categories and then group
into higher-level categories, building towards a structure
that reflects the product objectives and user needs (Garrett,
2011). When all components are determined; user needs,
purposes, content & layout, the following component visual
design – the last layer of the Garrett model – will be applied.
1.4.5. VISUAL DESIGN

The visual design applies to this research because after the
insights, ideas and solutions have been designed, they will
be tested by the method A/B testing. The (new) designs of
the public dashboards will be designed based on the
research results together with an internal graphic designer.
FIGURE 6: BOTTOM-UP ARCHITECTURAL APPROACH
A book “The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook:
Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications” describes guidelines for good visual designs. Five criteria
for good design are guidelines for evaluation of design solutions before, during and after the process to ensure that all
solutions remain valid as products, technology and user needs evolve. The first one “is it appropriate?” says that it should be
appropriate for the audience, environment, technology and culture. The second one “is it durable?” says that it should be
useful over time. The third one “is it verifiable? says that the design must be tested in the use environment by typical users.
Evaluating the feedback needs to be done properly to improve the product. The fourth one “does it have an impact?” says
that the design solution should not only solve the problem but also have an impact on the look and feel which means that
the user should find the product experience comfortable, useful and desirable. The fifth and last one “is it cost-effective?”
includes the question if the solution can be implemented and maintained.
How the eye sees, then read (Watzan, 2007). The human eye does not read one letter at the time or even one word at the
time. It moves along a line or text, grouping the text to form comprehensible phrases or information. Visual design is not a
series of subjective choices based on favourite colours or trendy typefaces – at best a cosmetic afterthought considered if
there are enough time and money. Good visual design is the tangible representation of product goals. Defining what the
experience would be like when someone uses the product is what the process of good design is about. Visual design choices
must be based on project goals, user perspective and informed decision making.
P a g e 26 | 71
In an environment in which the interface is the only tangible representation of a product, and user perception determines
product success, appropriate information presentation and visual design is the key. The following key questions could make
it possible to create a good design, are:
✓ Who are the users?

✓ How will they use this product?
✓ When will they use this product?
✓ Why will they use this product?
✓ Where will they use this product?
✓ How will your process evolve to support this product, as it evolves (Watzan, 2007)?
Torre (2017) explains ten basic principles of Visual Design. The first one is ‘Point, Line & Shape’. These are the most basic
building blocks of any design. Anything can be created with these principles, from simple icons to complex illustrations. If
three points are connected, a triangle will disappear. These shapes do not exist until something else is added. Therefore,
the second principle is ‘Colour’. The human eye can see over ten million different colours from red to violet. From a young
age, everyone learns to attribute certain values or meanings to specific colours.
An example: “Imagine the traffic lights for instance. They’re just colours but we learn that red means stop, green means go,
and yellow means step on the metal because you can make it before it turns red.” Picking the right colour can add meaning,
intention and a tone, but understanding the end user and for whom the designs are meant is what matters. The third one is
‘Typography’. It is one of the most important, and difficult, things for a designer to get right. It’s not only about what you
write but how you present it. Most typefaces are designed with a purpose. With the right typeface, a piece of text can be
powerful. Selecting the wrong typeface could mess up a powerful statement. Typography, as well as colour, allows defining
a tone.
The fourth one is ‘Space’. The balance between the space can be a maker or breaker, especially in typography. Considering
how each element/letter relates to each other, give them the precise breathing room. This is referred to as negative space.
Space could be powerful and help a viewer to navigate through the design or space can be a place to rest the eyes. The fifth
one is ‘Balance, Rhythm & Contrast’. This is where plain elements transform into something interesting and appealing.
Making some elements heavier than others will help to create contrast and rhythm and lead the eyes of the viewer through
the design effortlessly. Playing with ‘Scale’ may help with the rhythm and balance as well. This is the sixth principle. It helps
also with hierarchy. Not all the elements have the same importance, and one of the best ways to convey that is size. The
seventh principle is ‘Grid & Alignments’. Following a grid will structure the design and make it more pleasant and easier to
digest. The eighth principle is ‘Framing’. It is a key concept in photography but also in visual design. Framing something
makes all the difference. Try to direct the eye to what matters because it is about telling the right story in a good way. The
ninth principle is ‘Texture and Patterns’. Using them is not necessary, but sometimes they can, almost on their own, make
the design and add that extra interest it was missing. The last one is the ‘Visual concept’; the idea behind the design. This is
what distinguishes a great design (Torre, 2017).
Visual designs like fonts, colours, alignment and images are increasingly expected to not just create a usable experience,
but also to express complex brands traits such as friendliness, reliability or innovation. Research participants do not need to
have any design expertise – people do not need training in visual design to know whether they like something; in fact, users
can reliably rate how much they like visuals in less than a tenth of a second (according to one study by Gitte Lindgaard and
her colleagues). However, knowing whether someone likes a design doesn’t indicate whether the design conveys the right
brand qualities (Whitenton, 2018). First impressions present the visual stimulus to the user for a short amount of time. One
way to achieve this goal is: “The five-second test”. With this type of test, the stimulus is shown for 5 seconds (or for another
short period of time). This approach is best for accurately capturing people’s ‘gut reaction’. Five seconds of viewing time is
too short for reading copy or for noticing details like specific fonts or colours, but it is enough for forming an impression
which accurately reflects the visual style. Frequently, showing users more than one possible visual designs help them
identify what they like (or dislike) about each variation.
P a g e 27 | 71
If you ask participants to assess more than one design, be sure to vary the order in which they see the alternatives, since
part of people’s response may be influenced by which version they see first. (For example, if one version is easier to
understand, those who see that one first will have learned about the content and will be less confused by the other variation.)
Keep track of which version each person sees first, so you can take it into account when analysing responses (Whitenton,
2018). Bansode (2018) explains in his article “The evolution of visual design” that a new ‘flat’ design style effaces elements
that create depth and dimension, such as drop shadows and textures. Designers, today, incline towards flat design because
it leaves behind the important components of design — namely colour, shape and content. The terms ‘flat’ design and
‘minimalism’ are often used interchangeably today. Minimalism, however, is largely a component of ‘flat’ design.
Minimalism gained popularity as a design style around 1960 (Bansode, 2018).
P a g e 28 | 71
1.5. RESEARCH AIMS

Public dashboards should meet several components to create a positive user experience. The components that could solve
this problem are user needs, purposes (of the public dashboards), content, layout and visual design. This is visualized in a
conceptual model (see figure 7). Providing buildings with an innovative and affordable cloud-based energy management
system to accelerate their transition to sustainability. This will make buildings smart, energy-efficient and healthy. The
following external research goals are defined within this research:
✓ This research offers insights into the extent to which the public dashboards are providing information that
communicated information based on user needs and the purposes of the dashboards.
✓ Examining the relationship between public dashboards services and user needs, purposes, content, layout and visual
design to design public dashboards who are customized altogether.
✓ The aim of the research is to gain more insight into the knowledge, desire and ability of users related to public dashboard
services.
Public dashboards give real-time feedback to building users. To develop better usability, it is important to define the end-
uses and their needs of the public dashboards. At the beginning of this research, an understanding is created of the
audience. The components user needs and purposes are linked to each other. The relationship is examined between user
needs and purposes by talking to the participating customers: town government of Groningen, Vlagtwedde, Tynaarlo,
Hoogeveen and engineering office for the built government Archipunt Groningen. When it has become clear what the user
needs and what the purposes are, it could be related to understandable information shown on the public dashboard services.
Both purposes and user needs belong to the first plane of ‘The Elements of User Experience’ which influence the content of
the public dashboards. After those two components are defined, the process of what the public dashboards should
communicate to accomplish the purposes and user needs starts. Content and layout are components applying to the part
how information should be communicated on the public dashboard services. Those two components are linked to each
other by generating creative solutions with the users of how what kind of information should be communicated and how
this should look like according to the user needs – the first layer “Strategy plane” of the ‘Elements of User Experience’.
Content and layout are both linked to visual design. When it has become clear what kind of information should be provided
– if this is only about energy consumption, or this could also be other content – the visual design can start. Based on the
previous components – user needs, purposes, content, layout - the public dashboard can be designed and tested with the
audience. The The following research question is the main question of this research which includes all previous components:

The research question is divided into three sub-questions based on the components:
✓ How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

✓ What kind of information do the users need for them to understand the content?
✓ How can the public dashboards be designed to match the knowledge, ability and desire of the users?
FIGURE 7: CONCEPTUAL MODEL THAT DEFINES HOW TO CREATE A (POSITIVE) USER EXPERIENCE OF THE PUBLIC DASHBOARD SERVICES
P a g e 29 | 71
P a g e 30 | 71
P a g e 31 | 71
2. METHODS
Sub-questions are drafted to conduct research with multiple research methods. Interviews are executed to provide as much
information and feedback from the customers as possible. Executing brainstorm sessions are to see how creative the
customers are and what they need to reduce their energy consumption. A/B testing is conducted to compare the two
versions of the public dashboards to determine which performs best. Five customers of Sustainable Buildings are
participating in this research. Four of them are town governments: Town government of Groningen, Tynaarlo, Vlagtwedde
and Hoogeveen. Another customer is Archipunt Groningen, they are an engineering office for the built environment. The
research will be executed in Dutch with the customers because all companies speak natively Dutch. Conclusions will be
translated into English, but the raw data retain in Dutch. The research question that will be answered during this research
is:

The sub-questions are defined and linked to the following methods: user interviews, brainstorm and ideation session, A/B
testing, an evaluation survey and personages. These methods are described in the order based on the design thinking
process.
Part 1: Research
The sub-questions are ordered regarding the correct order of methods. The first question is linked to interviews. The user
needs are gathered to talk with the clients to collect much information about the purposes of the customers and their needs.
The interview questions can be found in Appendix 6.1.
• How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?
Sub-question two is linked to the brainstorm and ideation session, the brainstorm session is about the information (content)
that users desire. During the ideation session, creative ideas and solutions will be developed to solve their problem or meet
their needs.
The PowerPoint made for the brainstorm session can be found in Appendix 6.2.
• What kind of information do the users need for them to understand the content?
Part 2: Visual design

Sub-question three is linked to A/B testing and should give information about what information users want to see on the
public dashboards and understand at the same time. The visualization of the public dashboards will be established by A/B
testing because users can choose what they prefer the most. After the A/B testing, a short survey will be offered to the users
to explain their choices.
• How can the public dashboards be designed to match the knowledge, ability and desire of the users?
P a g e 32 | 71
2.1. LAYERS OF THE ‘ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE’

The layers from the Garrett model are followed with the used methods in this research. Garrett describes in his book the
five phases to achieve a good user experience for end users. If the work can only be started at each phase when the work is
finished in the phase before, it could lead to unsatisfactory results. That is why it is guaranteed that the work is completed
at every phase before the work is completed in the next phase (see figure below, figure 12).
FIGURE 8: MODEL + TABLE FROM 'ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE' MODEL (GARRETT, 2011)
FIGURE 9: ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE (GARRETT, 2011)

P a g e 33 | 71
2.1.1. STRATEGY PLANE

Strategy is the lowest layer of the model. This layer has provided direction for the next two questions to be answered:
✓ What do the users want to achieve with the public dashboard services?
✓ What does Sustainable Buildings B.V. want to achieve with the public dashboard services?
By answering the first question, it describes the goals of the users, also called the user needs. The second question answers
the goal of the public dashboard services and the product objectives are described within the organization. It is important to
determine who the exact users are. The following sub-question belongs to the first layer of the model is:
To collect information about the users, their needs/problems and experiences with the product, user interviews are
conducted to know why they use the public dashboards. Personages are practical to look at the public dashboard services
from the viewpoint of users because a clear reflection of the target audience is made. The components user needs and
purposes of this research belong to the strategy plane.
2.1.2. SCOPE PLANE

Scope is the second lowest plane of the model. In the first phase (strategy), the needs and goals of the public
dashboard services are defined and become clear. In the second phase (scope), these elements are converted into
functionalities and content the users want to have. The following sub-question can be answered:
The possible functionality and content are prioritized in a requirements document (a program of requirements). Personages
are created within the strategy layer; these fictional personages are also used in the scoping phase: by adding user stories
to them. User stories represent requirements from the viewpoint of the users. Personages serve as a tool to reflect on the
requirements of the design. Brainstorm session is executed to check which functionalities and content the user need to
understand the information on the public dashboards.
2.1.3. STRUCTURE PLANE

After the interviews and brainstorm session with the customers, a clear picture is made about the requirements and
what the users desire in their public dashboards. These requirements still do not describe how it must be merged.
The structure phase is used to make a conceptual ‘structure’ of the dashboards. The following sub-question belong to the
structure plane:
• What kind of information do the users need for

them to understand the content?
In this phase, the focus is on the information architecture

within the structure plane. The public dashboards are not
interactive for users, so interaction design is not relevant for
the public dashboards services. Information architecture:
refers to the content of the dashboards. The kind of
information became clear in the brainstorm session and is
structured with the COCD-box (see figure 12) in the
converge phase during the session.
FIGURE 10: COCD-BOX USED IN THE BRAINSTORM SESSION (CONVERGE

PHASE)
P a g e 34 | 71
2.1.4. SKELETON PLANE

The conceptual structure begins to give shape to the mass of requirements arising from the strategic objectives.
That structure is further refined, including identifying specific aspects of interface and information design that will
make the intangible structure concrete (Garrett, 2011). As mentioned in the structure plane, the interaction design is not
included. The following sub-question can be answered:
Information design: making choices about the presentation of the information/content so the users understand it more
easily. It is also about grouping pieces of information in a logical way. Interface design: Selecting the right interface elements
for the users and to organize them to make it understandable to use.
2.1.5. SURFACE PLANE

At the top of the five-plane model, the attention is to those aspects of the product that the users will notice first: the
sensory design. Here, content, functionality and aesthetics come together to produce a finished design that pleases
the senses while fulfilling all the goals of the other four planes (Garrett, 2011).
The surface layer indicates the text, images, corporate identity of the product but also the human senses (vision, hearing,
smell, taste and touch). Only one of the human senses, vision, belongs to this research. Through attention of information
design, the information elements of the page are determined and grouped; through the attention of visual design, the
arrangement of how it should be visually presented is determined. A “five seconds usability test “ is a method that could be
used to evaluate the visual design of a product; it means that a person sees a certain page for 5 seconds in which a first
impression is established. People make important decisions in the first few seconds that they look at an image. A/B testing
and a survey evaluation, as well as the five-second test, will be used to evaluate the new designs of the public dashboard
services. The following sub-question can be answered:
• How can de public dashboards be designed to match the knowledge, ability and desire of the users?
P a g e 35 | 71
2.2. PART 1: RESEARCH

2.2.1. INTERVIEWS
Interviews is a qualitative method and will be conducted as structured interviews. Gathering as much information as
possible and exploring the respondent’s point of view, feelings and perspectives is the goal of the interview. Discussion
points and some detailed questions are determined in a list to stimulate respondents to speak openly. There are two rounds
of interviews. The first one is with the person who oversees the public dashboards. the second one is with the users for
whom the public dashboards are meant for. The second round will be done with two of the five customers mostly because
of the amount of available time. The sub-question that should be answered with the user interviews is:
P ARTICIPANTS
Interviews are conducted with five customers to collect the first feedback, information about their experiences with the
public dashboards and their feelings and perspectives about it. Appointments with the customers are made via phone or
e-mail. Approaching respondents and making appointments for the user interviews will be done by Guido Aris. Guido Aris
is an account manager and will introduce the intern to the customers but are also approached by the intern itself. Aris
provide contact details of the person who needs to be contacted.
M ATERIALS , EQUIPMENT AND MEASURING INSTRUMENTS

To obtain suitable and reliable information, the interviews must execute accurately. The measuring instrument used for
the interviews is a structured interview format (see Appendix 4.1). The drafted questions are established in Dutch because
the research with the clients will be conducted in Dutch. The problem statement and corresponding sub-questions of the
research is a guide when preparing the list. Required materials and equipment are:
✓ Notebook
✓ Pens
✓ Mobile phone
• Audio recorder
• Time recorder
✓ A list of questions (see Appendix 6.1.)
P ROCEDURE
Guido Aris is an account manager at Sustainable Buildings B.V. and is introducing the intern to the customers but are
approached by the intern itself. Aris provide contact details of the person who needs to be contacted. Each customer will
be approached by phone or e-mail. Contacting over the phone is the quickest way to contact them. A company car is
available to travel to each customer, depending on the date and time of the appointments. As soon as the appointments
are made, supervisor Tuan will reserve the car when possible. Time and audio will be recorded during each user interview.
Permission is required of the respondents for the audio recordings. After the interviews, the respondents will be asked to
join for the next part of the research: brainstorm and ideation session. The results of the interviews will be analysed in a
summary of the interviews within the subjects the questions are categorized: purpose, positioning, target audience,
content and energy consumption/communication. The inputs from the customers will be used as a basis for the
improvements of the public dashboards. Information gathered from the interviews are used to develop a ‘Point of View’
(see figure..), which will be used for the brainstorm session.
P a g e 36 | 71
2.2.2. BRAINSTORM AND IDEATION SESSION

Brainstorm (and ideation) is a qualitative method which encourages people to create thoughts and ideas that can be a bit
crazy. Some of the ideas can be crafted into original, creative solutions to a problem (problem statement) while others can
inspire more ideas. By contrast, brainstorming provides a free and open environment that encourages everyone to
participate and think out of the box. The brainstorm session will be executed based on diverge and converge. The diverge
phase is divided into two methods: mind mapping and negative brainstorming. The converge phase is used with the COCD-
box (see Figure 10). The following sub-question will be answered during the brainstorm and ideation session:
P ARTICIPANTS
Brainstorm and Ideation sessions are conducted with the following customers: town government Groningen, Tynaarlo,
Vlagtwedde and engineering office for the built environment Archipunt. to collect much and great ideas to solve a problem.
The remaining customers did not feel It is undetermined if one person of each customer is participating during a session or
if it is executed individually. A group can take advantage of the full experience and creativity of all members, while
individual brainstorming has the most effective way when a simple problem needs to be solved.
M ATERIALS , EQUIPMENT AND MEASURE INSTRUMENTS

To obtain suitable and reliable information, the brainstorm and ideation session must execute accurately. The measuring
instrument is the Point of View; it includes the user, their need(s) which will be an insight to create new ideas and solution
(see Appendix 6.3. and figure 11). The empathise and define phases are guidelines that will help to develop sufficient
background knowledge and set a clear goal for the ideation sessions (Dam, Siang, 2017). Required materials and equipment
are:
✓ Pen and paper

✓ Markers
✓ Laptop
✓ Mobile phone
• Audio recorder
• Time recorder
✓ Post its/whiteboard/flip-over
✓ PowerPoint (see Appendix 4.3)
P ROCEDURE
The first step is to define the user, then the users’ needs and FIGURE 11: POINT OF VIEW FORMAT FOR THE BRAINSTORM AND
then the insights of the gathered information from the IDEATION SESSIONS (DAM, SIANG, 2017)
Empathise phase. This is already partly done during the user interviews. The purposes of the customers that using the
public dashboards will be established in the Define phase. When the user needs are acknowledged as well as the purposes,
the ideation phase can start. Within this phase, certain topics such as sustainability, energy efficiency, energy consumption
and energy reduction will be discussed and let their minds do the work to create an idea or solution. When each step is
completed, a Point of View (POV) is determined. Based on the Point of View, new ideas will be created by diverging and
converge. The diverge starts with mind mapping based on the needs which came from the interviews. After the diverge
phase, the converge phase starts. During this phase, the top three of best ideas will be selected. The COCD-box (see figure
12) will be used and helps to select the most promising ideas from a brainstorm with less restrains from the feasibility. It
has two axes: the originality of the idea and its ease of implementation.
Original but not (yet) feasible are placed in the yellow square, original and feasible are placed in the red square, the feasible
and already known ideas should be placed in the blue square. Ideally, participants should be encouraged to think about
unfeasible ideas connected to their dreams or future possibilities in the idea generation taking place before the selection
process. This allows new “out of the box” ideas to blossom. Clustering is the first step in the convergence phase. The
P a g e 37 | 71
participants should not have decided whether an idea belongs to the yellow, blue or red square. It is less confusing to add
grey sticky notes instead of using coloured ones. The matrix ensures that breakthrough ideas and future ideas in the
convergence phase are not overlooked due to being too new or too progressive. With clustering, many ideas from the
divergence phase can be reduced to a manageable number of ideas. It is a way to add structure, relief and colour to your
ideas chaos.
TABLE 3: PLANNING FOR THE BRAINSTORM SESSION
Activity Explanation Duration Who
Input from the previous Showing the results from the interviews for each 5-10 minutes Kim
interviews (point of view) customer
Diverge: Creating as many Based on the insights, help each other to generate as 20-30 minutes Participants
ideas as possible many ideas as possible. The starting point is: look at it
from a different angle. Identify the need, motivation
and decision-making processes
Mind mapping From a top three of the needs that emerged from the Participants
interviews, make a (small) mind map (write down
everything that comes to mind)
Negative brainstorm The problem is turned around and let yourselves be Participants
deflated on the negative aspects. In steps: formulate
problem statement; problem reflection; negative
brainstorming for solutions; all solutions turned into
positivity and develops ideas to solve the original
problem.
Converge: clustering ideas Choose the best ideas that suit the goals - A top 3 - 5 that 20 minutes Participants
(COCD-box) belongs to each group in the COCD-box
Prototype/design (co- Make multiple concepts. Test the concepts on 30 minutes Participants,
creation) assessment criteria (10 heuristics of Jakob Nielsen) Kim
P a g e 38 | 71
2.3. PART 2: VISUAL DESIGN

2.3.1. A/B TESTING
A/B testing (also known as split testing or bucket testing) is
a method of comparing two versions of an interface against
each other to determine which one performs better. It is a
quantitative method that works with a single variable, with
two versions (see figure 16 for an example). This method is
value to this research because it helps with the usability of
the public dashboards and what the customers prefer.
AB testing is essentially an experiment where two or more

variants of a page are shown to users at random, and
statistical analysis is used to determine which variation
performs better for a given conversion goal This method of
introducing changes to a user experience also allows the
experience to be optimized for the desired outcome or can
FIGURE 12: A/B TESTING; COMPARING TWO VERSIONS, THE CONTROL
make crucial steps in a marketing campaign more effective. AND VARIATION
(Optimizely, 2016). The following sub-question will be
answered by A/B testing:
P ARTICIPANTS
A/B testing will be conducted with the customers of Sustainable Buildings B.V. who participated in the brainstorm session
to see which version performs best according to the end-users. Employees of Sustainable Buildings B.V. could also provide
their experience and input to the public dashboards to make them more consistent. But these two will be separated from
each other to see significant changes between the customers and Sustainable Buildings B.V.
M ATERIALS , EQUIPMENT AND MEASURE INSTRUMENTS

To obtain suitable and reliable information, the A/B testing must execute accurately. Required materials and equipment
are:
✓ Laptop
✓ A/B testing software
✓ Each time two versions of different public dashboard designs
P ROCEDURE
Before thinking about elements on the pages of the public dashboards, the different problem areas has to be analysed. A/B
testing will be conducted as follows: first, it starts with collecting the data, the feedback or input of the end-users provides
insight into what should be optimized. Secondly, the goals must be identified. The conversion goals are the metrics that
you are using to determine whether the variation is more successful than the original version. Goals can be anything from
clicking a button or link to product purchases. Once the goal is identified, A/B testing ideas can be generated and
hypotheses for why they are better than the current version. When a list of ideas is made, they will be prioritized in terms
of expected impact and difficulty of implementation. An A/B testing tool or software (like Optimizely) could make the
desired changes to an element of the public dashboards. Ideas could be: changing the colour of a button, swapping the
order of elements on the page, hiding navigation elements, or something entirely custom.
Participants will randomly assign to either the control or variation version of the experience. The A/B testing software will
present the data from the experiment and show the difference between how the two versions performed, and whether
there is a statistically significant difference.
P a g e 39 | 71
2.3.2. SURVEY EVALUATION

A survey is a research instrument consisting of a series of questions (or other types of prompts) for
gathering information from respondents. The survey is part of the A/B testing and gives the respondents an opportunity to
explain their choices, experiences and feelings. This survey should consist around ten questions and will be offered after
the test phase.
After the last step, the users will fill in the survey (no more than 10 questions) about their choices and experiences. This is
to measure why the customers choose what they have chosen. The survey will be established after the define phase. The
A/B testing measurement instruments can only be developed after the brainstorm session is conducted. Therefore, the
measurement instrument cannot be found in the Appendix yet.
2.3.3. PERSONAGES
When the new designs of the public dashboards are tested, they can be implemented. The public dashboard should tell a
story on their own without anyone needs to explain them. The current situation is that the content is not understandable
for the users which results in not using the dashboards or not showing them to the final users. The research results present
the outcome of the personage. When the designs are developed, they will be tested with the customers.
For the final defence, the scenarios and personages will be used to tell the story to the experts to give them an involved
feeling with the product and the research. Personas are used to how a scenario how people are using public dashboards
and how the new design are telling their own stories. A persona in user-centred design and marketing is a fictional
character created to represent a user type that might use a site, brand, or product in a similar way. The purpose of personas
is to create reliable and realistic representations of your key audience segments for reference
P a g e 40 | 71
P a g e 41 | 71
3. EXPECTED RESULTS
Multiple components represent this research. This thesis is divided into two parts, the first part is research and the second
part is visual design. The research is separated into two methods; the first method is user interviews and the second method
is a brainstorming and ideation session. These methods will answer the first two sub-questions as described in chapter three;
methods. The user interviews will gather the users’ input, needs and feedback to define the purposes of the public
dashboards for each customer and their needs. With that information, a brainstorm/ideation session will be conducted to
provide creative solutions to accomplish their purposes and needs. The visual design is separated into two methods as well;
A/B testing and a survey evaluation. When the solutions for the new public dashboards are collected, a selection of the public
dashboards will be tested with the users by A/B testing.
PART 1: RESEARCH
3.1.1. USER INTERVIEWS
The user interviews will be executed in two sections. The first sections of the interviews are with the person who is involved
with project management, communication, energy or in other words who know much about the current public dashboards
in their buildings. The interviews will be conducted with the following customers: town government Groningen, Tynaarlo,
Vlagtwedde, Hoogeveen and engineering office for built environment Archipunt Groningen. However, six interviews will be
executed in total. Bernoulliborg at Zernike Complex Groningen will also be part of the interviews. The second section of the
interviews will be conducted with the actual users of the public dashboards. Suggesting improvements for the public
dashboards should be realized by getting to know the customers/users and their needs and/or problems. Therefore, the
users’ input, feedback and needs are the most important to be collected. The structure of the public dashboards will be
determined based on these aspects by the customers. The end-users will determine the content and layout of the public
dashboards, but the designs should be consistent.
3.1.2. BRAINSTORM AND IDEATION SESSION

The brainstorm session will be conducted to provide creative solutions for the improvements of the public dashboards. The
users create ideas and solutions that will meet their needs. To achieve the purpose of the public dashboards of their
company, information should be provided what they will understand and would like to see on the public dashboards. This
means that the essence of the brainstorm session could slightly be different because customers could use the public
dashboards for different purposes. Based on the needs of each customer, the brainstorm and ideation session will be
prepared based on the needs of each customer. The user needs will be provided from the user interviews.
PART 2: VISUAL DESIGN

3.1.3. A/B TESTING
The A/B testing will be conducted to see significant differences between the versions of the public dashboards. This is
important to know, to examine which public dashboards best satisfy the customers. The A/B testing will be conducted based
on the two sections of the user interviews. Based on these two inputs, the improvements of the public dashboards will be
testing with the target audience. The one that gives a better conversion rate, wins. After each A/B testing, a short survey
will be executed to let the users tell about their choices and experiences with the version of the public dashboards they have
seen to measure the outcomes.
3.1.4. SURVEY/EVALUATION
The survey will be conducted to evaluate the answers of the A/B testing. This is important to examine the choices of the
variants and the experiences and feelings of the customers. This survey should consist around ten questions and will be
offered after the test phase. It is expected that the customers who have the variants of the new designs based on the
interviews and brainstorm session, will give the new designs a better figure than the current designs of the public
dashboards. Because the new designs should perform better after their inputs for the given conversion goal.
P a g e 42 | 71
P a g e 43 | 71
4. DISCUSSION
This research contributes to more sustainable and energy-efficient buildings in the Netherlands. Input from the research
methods provides improvements for the public dashboards. This information is based on the user needs to accomplish the
customer’s purposes. Based on research results, there could be an opportunity to expend the public dashboards for
companies in the rest of the Netherlands. Public dashboards are developed to give insights into the energy consumption
in buildings which should support reducing the energy consumption. The inputs for the improvements for the dashboards
will be based on that to use for the A/B testing. The following research question will be answered when the research is
completed:
In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting

residents with sustainability of their buildings?
Social relevance is contributing to the worldwide climate change. Worldwide, the climate is changing. To prevent this,
international conferences are regularly organized. During the twenty-first climate conference (COP21) of the United
Nations in Paris at the end of 2015, the nearly 200 participating countries agreed on a binding climate agreement. This
should reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, and limit global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees, with
1.5 degrees as a target value. Public dashboards should make people more aware of energy consumption and provide
insights into energy consumption and/or production to reduce the energy in buildings which also contributes to the CO2
emissions.
The practical relevance of this bachelor thesis helps people to monitor their energy to contribute by making more building
energy-neutral. After 2020, it is legally required to construct (almost) energy-neutral. Dam (2013) did research about Smart
Energy Management for Households (HEMS). In this study, a framework of factors influencing the design of HEMS is
developed based on different elements and categories. The target audience for households does not match with the target
audience of public dashboard services. Buildings users/residents are different kind of users. Research about user needs of
the target audience of public dashboard services has not been carried out yet and provides a gap in the scientific
knowledge. More building owners and users could be more interested in the services to contribute to the energy transition
and making more buildings smart and sustainable. An indication of possible factors that could influence the research are:
✓ Deadlines that are unachievable could result in a delay of the research. To avoid or accept this risk, the
communication with the supervisors are imperative.
✓ Miscommunication with the companies’ supervisor is an internal risk and can affect the end results and the
planning.
✓ The quality of the products could decrease because when there is no vision of the end results and this is not
communicated correctly with the supervisors. Maintaining the communication plan should avoid decreasing the
quality, planning and communication during the research.
✓ An external risk could be a change in the problem statement or research purpose/question. This should be
accepted and communicated as early as possible with the supervisors. Customers of Sustainable Buildings B.V.
could be in a busy period which means there is no or less time available to cooperate with the research.
✓ Measurement instruments could not be valid because they are self-made. Although, the interview questions are
drafted based on the corresponding sub-question. This could be avoided by checking them by experts.
P a g e 44 | 71
P a g e 45 | 71
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: An example of the public dashboard (about gas consumption) Source: Sustainable Buildings (n.d.) Retrieved
September 7th, 2018, from https://sustainablebuildings.nl) ........................................ Fout! Bladwijzer niet gedefinieerd.
Figure 2: Elements of user experience by Garrett (2011) ................................................................................................... 15
Figure 3: User Experience (UX) Honeycomb by Morville (2004) ........................................................................................ 16
Figure 4: Examples of different current public dashboards ............................................................................................... 22
Figure 5: Top-down architectural approach ...................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 6: Bottom-up architectural approach .................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 7: Conceptual model that defines how to create a (positive) user experience of the public dashboard services ...... 28
Figure 8: Model + table from 'Elements of User experience' model (Garrett, 2011)…………………………………………………….30
Figure 9: Elements of user experience (Garrett, 2011)…………………………………………………………………………………………..30
Figure 10: COCD-box used in the brainstorm session (converge phase)……………………………………………………………………31
Figure 11: Point of view format for the brainstorm and ideation sessions (Dam, Siang, 2017)……………………………………….34
Figure 12: A/B testing; Comparing two versions, the control and variation……………………………………………………………….36
Figure 13: Extensive conceptual model with the elements of UX by Garrett (2011) and the associated methods…………….45
Figure 14: Energy transition 2008-2050 in the Netherlands……………………………………………………………………………………55
Figure 15:Elements of User Experience (Garrett, 2000; Garrett, 2011)…………………………….……………………………………….62
Figure 16: Honeycomb by Morville (2004…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..63
Figure 17: Ten heuristics by Nielsen (1995)……………………………………………………………………………………………………..….64
Figure 18: Use compass to evaluate the new public dashboards designs (Valkenburg et la, 2008); edited by Martin Specken
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….66
Figure 19: Template with an example of a Point of View (POV) with the a formulation of an actionable problem statement
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………….71
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Examples of units used on the public dashboards ................................................................................................ 14
Table 2: Product objectives from inside the organization .................................................................................................. 17
Table 3: Planning for the brainstorm session ..................................................................................................................... 37
Table 4: Operationalization of the public dashboard services ........................................................................................... 49
P a g e 46 | 71
P a g e 47 | 71
REFERENCES
Bansode, A. N. (2018). The evolution of visual design. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://uxdesign.cc/the-evolution-of-
visual-design-fbfcd2675cf5
Carbon Trust. (2013). Creating an awareness campaign. Retrieved from https://www.carbontrust.com/resources/guides/energy-

efficiency/employee-awareness-and-office-energy-efficiency/
Carbon Trust. (2018). Employee awareness and office energy efficiency. Retrieved October 24, 2018, from
https://www.carbontrust.com/resources/guides/energy-efficiency/employee-awareness-and-office-energy-efficiency/
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek; CBS. (2017). Aandeel hernieuwbare energie 5,9 procent in 2016. Retrieved October 5, 2018,
from https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2017/22/aandeel-hernieuwbare-energie-5-9-procent-in-2016
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. (2016). Only 5.5 percent of energy comes from renewable sources. Retrieved October 5, 2018,
from https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2016/13/only-5-5-percent-of-energy-comes-from-renewable-sources
Dam, Rikke., Siang, T. (2017). What is Ideation – and How to Prepare for Ideation Sessions | Interaction Design Foundation.
Retrieved October 4, 2018, from https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/what-is-ideation-and-how-to-
prepare-for-ideation-sessions
Duggirala, S. (2016). 10 Usability Heuristics with Examples – Prototypr. Retrieved December 1, 2018, from
https://blog.prototypr.io/10-usability-heuristics-with-examples-4a81ada920c
Essent. (2018). Het kilowattuur en andere eenheden van energie. Retrieved November 26, 2018, from
https://www.essent.nl/content/particulier/kennisbank/stroom-gas/kilowattuur.html
European Commission. (2018). Buildings. Retrieved October 5, 2018, from https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-

efficiency/buildings
Gabry, O. El. (2016). UX — A quick glance about The 5 Elements of User Experience. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from
https://medium.com/omarelgabrys-blog/ux-a-quick-glance-about-the-5-elements-of-user-experience-part-2-
a0da8798cd52
Garrett, J. J. (Ed.). (2011). The elements of User Experience (Second).
Groningen Energieneturaal. (2018). Monitor Klimaatbeleid Groningen. Retrieved October 24, 2018, from
https://www.groningenenergieneutraal.nl/
Haslam, E., Hearn, C., Hall, J., Hebdon, B., & Joy, J. (n.d.). CONSERVATION. Retrieved from
http://www.arch.utah.edu/net_zero_energy_project/documentation/Group8_Conservation-2.pdf
Janda, K. B. (2011). Buildings don’t use energy: people do. Architectural Science Review, 54(1), 15–22.
https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2009.0050
Krug, S. (2005). Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to the Web (2nd Edition). Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense
Approach to the Web (2nd Edition). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.1614
Li, D. H. W., Yang, L., & Lam, J. C. (2013). Zero energy buildings and sustainable development implications – A review. Energy,
54, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENERGY.2013.01.070
Nielsen, J. (1995). 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design. Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved from
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/
Optimizely. (2016). A/B Testing. Retrieved October 11, 2018, from https://www.optimizely.com/optimization-glossary/ab-
testing/
Peter Morville. (2004). User Experience Design. Retrieved November 26, 2018, from
https://semanticstudios.com/user_experience_design/
Shrouf, F., & Miragliotta, G. (2015). Energy management based on Internet of Things: practices and framework for adoption in
production management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 100, 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.03.055
P a g e 48 | 71
Siemens Netherlands. (2018). Ingenuity for life creates perfect places. Retrieved September 24, 2018, from
https://www.siemens.com/nl/nl/home/bedrijf/thema-gebieden/intelligent-
infrastructure/gebouwen.html#tdborder1pxsolidcccbrmsodataplacementsamecellHetwaarborgenvancontinuiteit&s_kw
cid=AL!462!3!276965413903!b!!g!!%2Bbuilding %2Bsustainability
Smeltzer, D. (2018). Corporate Sustainability Model for Employee Engagement. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from
https://coolchoices.com/blog/corporate-sustainability-model-employee-engagement/
Specken, M. (2013a). Gebruikskwaliteit meten met het gebruikskompas. Deel 1: Willen  » Door: Martin Specken | /via @42bis.
Retrieved November 30, 2018, from https://www.42bis.nl/2013/04/gebruikskwaliteit-meten-met-het-gebruikskompas-
deel-1-willen/
Specken, M. (2013b). Gebruikskwaliteit meten met het gebruikskompas. Deel 2: Kunnen  » Door: Martin Specken | /via @42bis.
Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://www.42bis.nl/2013/05/gebruikskwaliteit-met-met-het-gebruikskompas-deel-2-
kunnen/
Specken, M. (2013c). Gebruikskwaliteit meten met het gebruikskompas. Deel 3: Kennen  » Door: Martin Specken | /via @42bis.
Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://www.42bis.nl/2013/06/gebruikskwaliteit-meten-met-het-gebruikskompas-deel-
3-kennen/
Sustainable Buildings. (n.d.). Sustainable Buildings. Retrieved October 6, 2018, from https://sustainablebuildings.nl/
Torre, J. (2017). 10 Basic Principles of Visual Design. Retrieved November 16, 2018, from https://blog.prototypr.io/10-basic-
principles-of-visual-design-55b86b9f7241
Valkenburg, R., Vos-Vlamings, M., Bouma, J., Willems, R. (2008). Basisboek human technology interaction. Wolters-Noordhoff.
Retrieved from https://www.noordhoffuitgevers.nl/product/-/webshop/hoger-onderwijs/exact-techniek-
onderzoek/basisboek-human-technology-interaction/9789001702519
van Santen, Hester., van der Walle, E. (2017). Nederland haalt doelstelling duurzame energie niet - NRC. Retrieved September
26, 2018, from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/10/19/nederland-haalt-doelstelling-duurzame-energie-niet-13574904-
a1577830
van Santen, H. (2017). ‘De EU mag nog maar negen jaar CO2 uitstoten’ - NRC. Retrieved December 6, 2018, from
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/11/06/de-eu-mag-nog-maar-negen-jaar-co2-uitstoten-13882481-a1580167
Visser, J. (2018). Slechts 100 bedrijven zijn schuldig aan 71% uitstoot | Metronieuws.nl. Retrieved December 6, 2018, from
https://www.metronieuws.nl/in-het-nieuws/2018/10/slechts-100-bedrijven-zijn-schuldig-aan-71-uitstoot
Wattisduurzam.nl. (2018). Hoeveel groene energie wordt er in Nederland opgewekt? Retrieved September 26, 2018, from
http://www.wattisduurzaam.nl/14437/energie-opwekken/hoeveel-groene-energie-wordt-er-nederland-opgewekt-2/
Watzan, S. (2007). The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications,
Second Edition. (J. A. J. Andrew Sears, Ed.) (Second). CRC Press. Retrieved from
https://books.google.nl/books?hl=en&lr=&id=b3rg6wmjc5QC&oi=fnd&pg=PA263&dq=visual+design&ots=vB06p1btPg&s
ig=Vy2SAvhDvXC1faDLpOZulUJCh7c#v=onepage&q=visual design&f=false
Whitenton, K. (2018). How to test visual design. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330448
WikiHow. (2016). How to Reduce Energy Consumption in a Commercial Building: 7 Steps. Retrieved October 7, 2018, from
https://www.wikihow.com/Reduce-Energy-Consumption-in-a-Commercial-Building
P a g e 49 | 71
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: OPERATIONALIZATION
TABLE 4: OPERATIONALIZATION OF THE PUBLIC DASHBOARD SERVICES
VARIABLE DIMENSIONS INDICATORS SUB- ITEMS ELEMENTS OF USER METHODS

INDICATORS EXPERIENCE (UX)
User needs Want Useful To what extend does the public dashboard match the User needs Interviews
intended goal that the user wants to use?
Has the goal been achieved? Functional Interviews
specifications
Desirable Does the public dashboard meet the user needs? Content requirements Interviews
To what extend does the public dashboards meet the user Interviews
needs?
Designing Valuable Does the public dashboards add value to the user? User needs Interviews
public To what extend does the public dashboard add value to the Interviews
dashboard user?
services Nice Does the use of the public dashboard provide joy? Interaction design Interviews
based on user
needs To what extend does the public dashboard provide joy? Interviews
Ability/can Useful Is the target audience able to use it? Information design Interviews
In what way
do public To what extend does the users capable of use the public
dashboards dashboards for its intended purpose?
services Accessible Can it be used for what it is intended by the target group? Information design
contribute to
connecting Content Comfortable Is it pleasant to use for a long time and several times? Interaction design Interviews
residents
with Simplicity Are the public dashboards efficient? Information Brainstorm
sustainability architecture session
of their
buildings? Know Understandable Does the users understand how to use the public dashboards? Interaction design
P a g e 50 | 71
Layout Recognizable Does the use of the public dashboards match expectations Product objectives Brainstorm
and/or previous experiences? session
Learnable Are the public dashboards easily in use/user-friendly? Functional Brainstorm

specifications session
How much effort is required to use the public dashboards?

Findable To what extent is content and functionality visible or to be Information Brainstorm
found? architecture session
Visual design Experience Verifiable Is it verifiable? Content requirements A/B testing
Public dashboards must be tested in the use environment by

typical users. Evaluating the feedback
Impact Does the public dashboards have impact? Sensory design Survey
The design solution should not only solve the problem but also
have impact on the look and feel which means that the user
should find the product experience comfortable, useful and
desirable
P a g e 51 | 71
APPENDIX 2: EXTENSIVE CONCEPTUAL MODEL
FIGURE 13: EXTENSIVE CONCEPTUAL MODEL WITH THE ELEMENTS OF UX BY GARRETT (2011) AND THE ASSOCIATED METHODS
All components are based on the public dashboard services. They need to be designed based on the user needs. If the user
needs are defined, the purposes of the public dashboards could also be defined. For what reason the customers are using
the public dashboards and what needs to be communicated to achieve that goal. Therefore, the content is essential. The
content needs to be understandable to every user. When the information is clear, the information needs to be visualized.
The layout of the public dashboards is important to show the information in a good structure. For these last two
components, the visual design is the last component that is important to improve the (current) public dashboards.
In the model of Elements of User Experience by Garrett (2011), the user needs and project objectives are part of the first layer
(strategy) that need to be defined. After that, the purposes and understandable information, but also the content is part of
the functional specifications and content requirements, part of the scope layer. Content is defined based on the content
requirements, information architecture and information design of the Garrett model (2011). The component layout is part
of the interface design which belongs to the skeleton layer of the Garrett model. Visual design belongs to the sensory design,
part of the surface plane of the Garrett model.
P a g e 52 | 71
APPENDIX 3: CURRENT PUBLIC DASHBOARD SERVICES

P a g e 53 | 71
P a g e 54 | 71
P a g e 55 | 71
P a g e 56 | 71
P a g e 57 | 71
P a g e 58 | 71
P a g e 59 | 71
P a g e 60 | 71
P a g e 61 | 71
APPENDIX 4: ENERGY TRANSITION PLANNING 2008-2050
FIGURE 14: ENERGY TRANSITION 2008-2050 IN THE NETHERLANDS

P a g e 62 | 71
APPENDIX 5: HUMAN TECHNOLOGY MODELS

5.1: ELEMENTS OF USER E XPERIENCE BY GARRET (2011)
FIGURE 15: ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE (GARRETT, 2000; GARRETT, 2011)
The top layer of the model is changed from visual design (2000) to sensory design (2011).
Strategy plane. The goal here is to define the user needs and product objectives. The reason for the product, why it is
created, who are we doing this for, why people are willing to use it and why they need it. Scope plane. Defines the functional
and content requirements. What are the features, and content contained in the application or product? The requirements
should fulfil and be aligned with the strategic goals. Functional Requirements: it’s the requirements about the functions, or
features in the product, how features work with each other, and how they interrelate with each other. These features are
what users need to reach the objectives. Content Requirements: it’s the information we need to provide the value.
Information like text, images, audio and videos. Without defining the content, we have no idea about the size or time
required to complete the project. Functional specifications vs. content requirements: the feature is having a media player
for songs, while the content is the audio files for these songs. Structure plane. Defines how user interacts with the product,
how system behave when user interact, how it’s organized, prioritized, and how much of it. The structure is split into two
components, interaction design & information architecture.
Interaction design: given the functional requirements, it defines how a user can interact with the product, and how the
system behaves in response to the user interactions. Information architecture: given the content requirements, it defines
the arrangement of content elements, how they are organized, to facilitate human understanding.
Good interaction design:
• helps people to accomplish their goals

• effectively communicates interactivity and functionality (what user can do)
• informs the user about state changes (the file has been saved, or any feedback), while they interact
• prevents user error or mistakes, like the system asks the user to confirm potentially harmful action (i.e. deletion)
P a g e 63 | 71
Good information architecture:
• organizes, categorizes, and prioritizes the information based on user needs and business objectives
• makes it easy to understand and move through information presented
• flexible to accommodate growth and adapt to change
• appropriate for the audience
Skeleton plane. Skeleton determines the visual form on the screen, presentation and arrangement of all elements that
makes us interact with the functionality of the system that exists on the interface. Also, how the user moves through the
information, and how information is presented to make it effective, clear, obvious. Interface design presenting and
arranging interface elements to enable users to interact with the functionality of the system. Navigation design: how to
navigate through the information using the interface. Information design: defines the presentation of information in a way
that facilitates understanding. Surface plane. It’s the total of all the work and decisions we have made. It determines how
does the product will look like, and choosing the right layout, typography and colours. In the surface plane, we are dealing
with visual design (sensory design), It’s concerned about the visual appearance of content, controls, which gives a clue of
what user can do, and how to interact with them. It should make things easier to understand, increase cognitive ability to
absorb what users see on the screen.
To summarize how those 5 elements work together, it starts with the strategy, which is the foundation of any successful
UX. Strategy becomes scope when user & business needs, need to be translated to requirements for content &
functionality. The scope is given structure when we define the ways of interaction with the system functionality, the system
response, and how information is organized. Sketching each screen of the system (i.e. using wireframes) to present the
areas of interactions and structure defined in Structure, and how information will be presented clearly, is what we do in the
skeleton. Finally, in the surface, we take all the work and decisions we have made into the final visual presentation (Gabry,
2016).
5.2 USER EXPERIENCE HONEYCOMB BY MORVILLE (2004)
Useful Do I need this?

Usable Can I use this easily?
Findable Can I do what I want quickly?

Credible Can I trust this?
Accessible Can I use it?
Desirable Do I want to use this?
Valuable What is the value?
FIGURE 16: HONEYCOMB BY MORVILLE (2004)

P a g e 64 | 71
5.3: TEN USABILITY HEURISTICS BY NIELSEN (1995)
FIGURE 17: TEN HEURISTICS BY NIELSEN (1995)

P a g e 65 | 71
1 Visibility of system status
The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable
time.
2 Match between system and the real world
The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-
oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.
3 User control and freedom
Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted
state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo.
4 Consistency and standards
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing.
5 Error prevention
Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either
eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to
the action.
6 Recognition rather than recall
Minimize the user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember
information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily
retrievable whenever appropriate.
7 Flexibility and efficiency of use
Accelerators — unseen by the novice user — may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system
can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions.
8 Aesthetic and minimalist design
Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue
competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility.
9 Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors
Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively
suggest a solution.
10 Help and documentation
Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and
documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried
out, and not be too large (Nielsen, 1995).
P a g e 66 | 71
5.4: USE COMPASS BY VALKENBURG (2008)

With a use compass, a number between zero and ten is assigned to a certain factor of the product. By giving all twelve
factors a rating, it is easily understand what the worst performing factors are. By using two colours, the difference between,
for example, two products or two versions of a product can be made transparent.
Factors of the use quality and usability:
Do the users want to use it? How is the connection to their level of knowledge?
• Is the product helpful? • Is it understandable?
• Is it desirable? • Is the design recognizable?
• Is the use valuable? • Is the use learnable?
• Is it fun to use? (Specken, 2013a) • Is the info findable? (Specken, 2013c)
Can (future) users use the product?

• Is it useful?
• Is it accessible to everyone?
• Is the use comfortable?
• Is it easy to use? (Specken, 2013b)
FIGURE 18: USE COMPASS TO EVALUATE THE NEW PUBLIC DASHBOARDS DESIGNS (VALKENBURG ET LA, 2008); EDITED BY MARTIN SPECKEN
P a g e 67 | 71
APPENDIX 6: MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS (IN DUTCH)

6.1: INTERVIEWS QUESTIONS (WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOLVED WITH ENERGY AND THE PUBLIC DASHBOARDS)
Ik studeer Human Technology aan de Hanzehogeschool Groningen, en ben momenteel aan het afstuderen bij Sustainable
Buildings. Human Technology houdt in dat producten gebruiksvriendelijker worden gemaakt door te weten wie de
eindgebruikers zijn en deze bij het proces te betrekken. Sustainable buildings willen graag weten waarom onze klanten de
publieke dashboard gebruiken en wat hun behoeften/problemen zijn die opgelost/aangepakt moeten worden door middel
van de dashboards. Is de informatie die aangeboden wordt begrijpelijk door de gebruikers en wat zou er toegevoegd of
aangepast kan worden zodat het aansluit bij de doelen en behoeften van de organisatie. Het doel van het interview is om
informatie te verzamelen over de doelen van de public dashboards en wat de gewenste informatie is dat ermee
gecommuniceerd wordt of moet worden.
D OEL
✓ Wat was de voornaamste reden om voor Sustainable Buildings te kiezen?
✓ Uit welke behoefte hebben jullie voor de publieke dashboards gekozen?
✓ Wat willen jullie met de publieke dashboards bereiken?
o Hebben jullie een doel gesteld?
✓ Wat vind je van het idee als er een geluid wordt afgespeeld als iets goed is bereikt aan het einde van de week?
o Of zou je dit als irritant ervaren of voor de mensen?
✓ Ervaarden/ervaren jullie problemen met het energie verbruik? (hoge energierekeningen, etc.)
✓ Ervaren jullie enige problemen met het product?
✓ Hoe kan Sustainable Buildings jullie om het volgende niveau te bereiken?
o Bijvoorbeeld: Energie-efficiëntie
o Of iets anders
✓ Wat verwacht je van de communicatie van de bezoekers/klanten van het bedrijf?
o Wordt er een reactie verwacht?
o Wat is de interactie tussen de personen en de public dashboards?
▪ Hoeveel interactie, veel/weinig?
✓ Op basis van jullie doel, wat voor informatie wordt daarbij verwacht?
✓ Ligt de voorkeur bij visualisaties (zoals grafieken of iets dergelijks) of tekstueel?
D OELGROEP
✓ Wie kijken het meest naar de publieke dashboards?
o Voor wie is het bedoeld?
o Hoeveel procent zijn personen die werken in het bedrijf?
▪ Wie zijn de medewerker die binnen in het bedrijf werken?
o Hoeveel procent zijn bezoekers?
▪ Wie zijn de bezoekers die extern in het bedrijf komen?
✓ Wat is de gemiddelde tijd dat er naar de dashboards gekeken wordt?
✓ Hoeveel mensen bezoeken het gebouw per dag/week?
✓ Hoe kunnen de mensen meer betrokken worden?
o Om naar de publieke dashboards te kijken
✓ Heb je het idee dat mensen zich beter voelen met de aanwezigheid van de dashboard(s)?
P OSITIONING
✓ Waar bevindt het publieke dashboard in het gebouw?
o Is dit de juiste positie? Of Waar zou hij beter kunnen staan?
✓ Op welke hoogte zijn de publieke dashboards ingesteld?
✓ In wat voor ruimte bevinden de publieke dashboards zich?
o Grote ruimte, kleine ruimte/ Vlakbij de ingang of receptie, of ergens in een gang
P a g e 68 | 71
T IJDSTIPPEN
✓ Hoe denk je over verschillende informatie op verschillende tijdstippen gedurende de dag?
o Is dit waardevol?
o Is dat van toegevoegde waarde voor de doelgroep?
▪ Wat zou je ´s ochtends willen zien als je het gebouw binnen komt?
▪ Wat zou je willen zien als je tijdens lunchtijd naar het publieke dashboard kijkt?
▪ En wanneer je het gebouw verlaat?
I NHOUD / PUBLIEKE DASHBOARDS

✓ Wordt de informatie begrepen op de publieke dashboards?
✓ Hoe zouden de publieke dashboards (qua design of inhoud) (nog meer) bij het verminderen bij energie verbruik
kunnen helpen?
✓ Wat is je indruk van de huidige publieke dashboards?
o Wat vind je van het ontwerp?
✓ Wat zijn de goede aspecten van de publieke dashboards?
✓ Wat zijn de mindere/slechte punten van de publieke dashboards?
✓ Als je de publieke dashboards een cijfer mocht geven, wat voor cijfer zou je het dan geven op de schaal van 1 tot
10? (10 is perfect, 1 is onvolmaakt)
✓ Kun je de informatie plaatsen?
o Snap je de context van de informatie? / Of mis je de context?
✓ Voorkeur voor horizontaal of verticaal publieke dashboard?
C OMMUNICATIE DUURZAAMHEID / ENERGIE - EFFICIËNTIE

✓ Zijn duurzaamheid en energy efficiëntie onderwerpen die jullie bespreken binnen het bedrijf?
o Hoeveel mensen zijn actief met betrekking tot energy efficiëntie en duurzaamheid?
✓ Hoe communiceren dit met jullie medewerkers?
✓ Spelen de publieke dashboards hierin een rol?
✓ Wat zijn jullie gewenste uitkomsten in de communicatie over deze onderwerpen?
✓ Zijn jullie bezig met het vergroten van duurzaamheid binnen jullie organisatie?
o Gebruik van hernieuwbare energie, bijvoorbeeld zonnepanelen, etc. Waarom wel niet?
o Gebruik van het openbaar vervoer of meer fietsen?
o Waterbesparende acties, etc.
Wat zou je graag willen zien op een publiek dashboard over het onderwerp duurzaamheid/energy-efficiëntie?
✓ Als je iets zou kunnen veranderen/verbeteren, wat zou dat dan zijn over het onderwerp duurzaamheid/energy-
efficiëntie?
E NERGIE VERBRUIK
✓ Zijn jullie bewuster bezig met energie verbruik binnen de organisatie?
o Buiten de organisatie?
o Wat merken jullie daarvan? /Doen jullie daar iets mee?
✓ Heb je het idee dat medewerkers meer bezig zijn met energie verbruikt?
o Computers uitzetten, lampen uit, etc.
✓ Wat zou u willen zien op een publiek dashboard over het onderwerp energieverbruik?
✓ Als je iets zou kunnen veranderen of verbeteren, wat zou het dan zijn, op het gebied van onderwerp
energieverbruik?
✓ Is het energie verbruik minder geworden sinds het gebruik van de publieke dashboards?
o Zou je dit terug willen zien op het dashboard of hoe zou je dat terug willen zien?
P a g e 69 | 71
6.2: BRAINSTORM SESSION POWERPOINT

P a g e 70 | 71
P a g e 71 | 71
6.3: POINT OF VIEW

By the end of the Define mode, the goal is to construct a meaningful and actionable problem statement, also known as
a Point Of View (POV) (Dam, Siang, 2017). This could be different for each customer. Therefore, it is necessary to define
Point of View for each customer to create a solution for their specific need or problem. To define the POV, knowing what
type of user you need to design for. The most essential needs to fulfil should be considered. The insights that are gathered
during the Empathise phase, are used to define the user needs. Figure 17 shows a template of a POV with an example.
Figure 18 shows how to combine the three elements – user, needs, insights – to articulate an actionable problem statement
for each customer that drives the rest of the session to come up with ideas and solutions.
FIGURE 19: TEMPLATE WITH AN EXAMPLE OF A POINT OF VIEW (POV) WITH THE A FORMULATION OF AN ACTIONABLE PROBLEM STATEMENT

Onderzoeksvoorstel 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Onderzoeksvoorstel 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P a g e 1 | 71

In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting

I. How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

Part 2: Visual design ....................................................................................................................................................... 41

In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting residents

1.1. PUBLIC DASHBOARD SERVICES

kilowatt-hour (the h comes from English: hour). One

TABLE 1: EXAMPLES OF UNITS USED ON THE PUBLIC DASHBOARDS

kWh Kilowatt-hour PPM Parts per million

1.2. HUMAN TECHNOLOGY MODELS

Appendix 5.1. shows an explanation of the model with the elements.

In the strategy plane, the same strategic concerns are both

1.2.2. USER EXPERIENCE HONEYCOMB BY MORVILLE (2004)

Appendix 5.2 shows the model with the explanations

“Businesses have now come to recognize that

1.2.3. USABILITY HEURISTICS BY NIELSEN (1995)

The ten usability heuristics can be found in Appendix 5.3.

1.2.4. GEBRUIKSKOMPAS ‘USE COMPASS’ BY VALKENBURG (2008)

1.3. SUBSTANTIATION OF CHOICE METHODOLOGIES

1.4.1. USER NEEDS

TABLE 2: PRODUCT OBJECTIVES FROM INSIDE THE ORGANIZATION

Efficiency: reducing energy consumption

Public dashboards must increase awareness

1.4.1.3. M UNICIPALITY OF G RONINGEN

1.4.1.4. C USTOMERS OF S USTAINABLE B UILDINGS B.V.

Peter Petersen – GrESCo, Municipality of Groningen (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.)

Dick Jager – RuG, Sustainability manager (Sustainable Buildings, n.d.)

Steve Krug; author of the book ‘don’t make me think’

J AKOB N IELSEN (1995)

The usability heuristics can be found in Appendix 5.3.

V ALKENBURG (2008); M ARTIN S PECKEN (2013)

The use compass can be found in Appendix 5.4.

KISS (keep it simple stupid) principle of Steve Krug (2005)

Public dashboards not only show the energy that is

1.4.2.1. E MPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT IN

FIGURE 4: EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT CURRENT PUBLIC DASHBOARDS

Energy is one of the largest controllable overheads in office buildings

Book: “Don’t make me think” by Steve Krug (Krug, 2005)

Garrett (2011) suggest two ways of creating a

1.4.5. VISUAL DESIGN

✓ Who are the users?

1.5. RESEARCH AIMS

In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting residents

✓ How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

In what way do public dashboards services contribute to connecting residents

The interview questions can be found in Appendix 6.1.

• How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

Part 2: Visual design

2.1. LAYERS OF THE ‘ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE’

FIGURE 9: ELEMENTS OF USER EXPERIENCE (GARRETT, 2011)

2.1.1. STRATEGY PLANE

• How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

2.1.2. SCOPE PLANE

2.1.3. STRUCTURE PLANE

• What kind of information do the users need for

In this phase, the focus is on the information architecture

FIGURE 10: COCD-BOX USED IN THE BRAINSTORM SESSION (CONVERGE

2.1.4. SKELETON PLANE

2.1.5. SURFACE PLANE

2.2. PART 1: RESEARCH

• How are the users experiencing the current public dashboards?

M ATERIALS , EQUIPMENT AND MEASURING INSTRUMENTS

2.2.2. BRAINSTORM AND IDEATION SESSION