Pick an idea, prototype it, test it, report back
As the agency, we were handed a client's research on staff and students' connection to nature at the University, with a portfolio of ideas already developed from it. Our job was to evaluate that idea portfolio, pick one, prototype it, test it and report back whether it was worth implementing.
From personas to the touchpoints worth testing
- Three personas
Sustainable-fashion lovers, nature lovers and university decision-makers.
- A storyboard, then three journey maps
A workshop series: buying second-hand, making with foraged dyes, and selling.
- The touchpoints to test
A final pass marking a poster, an Eventbrite sign-up, the workshop, feedback, and a petition for the University to support it.
- Business design
A value proposition for a garment upcycling workshop with forageable dyes, with partners (the University and its fashion, foraging, film and photography societies) and channels (their mailing lists).
Forageable dyes I listed: walnut hulls, sawtooth oak acorn cups, oak galls, iris roots, carob pods.
Desirable, but change the format
The team tested a draft poster, low-fidelity mock-ups (recycled-material plants and dyed samples) and the three personas with postgraduate students in class. I wasn't there that day; this is what the team recorded.
Desirable
Strong interest in the outdoor and creative parts, and the idea read as meaningful.
Change the format
Two hours outdoors felt too long, and people wanted foraging and dyeing on the same day as one experience.
Show real results
The mock-ups didn't show the colour range; people asked for real fabric samples.
Worries
Weather, seasonal availability, and not feeling confident identifying the right plants.
By persona
Eco-conscious students valued the low cost and the nature; fashion lovers cared about colour choice and timing; outdoor lovers wanted easy routes.
Desirable and feasible, but weak as a programme
My research on the supply side: 500+ men's shirts on Vinted showed plenty of garments for an individual to upcycle, but not a living for many people, and every forageable dye we listed needs preserving. So it tested as desirable and feasible, but weak as an entrepreneurial programme for the University to invest in.
Good work without a shared record becomes an argument
What happened
I missed the in-class test and worked remotely through the team chat. My contribution and the team's view of it drifted apart. We hadn't agreed how work would be recorded, so when it came to sharing credit there was no shared record to settle it. I was moved off the delivery, and the project stopped after testing.
Why it matters
The prototype work was solid, and the demand test was designed and ready to run. But a project only counts once it's delivered. Without an agreed record of who did what, good work becomes an argument.
My rules for next time
- Agree roles and a contribution log at the start, and keep it up week by week.
- Share my work in the team's shared space from day one, as I do it.
- If I can't attend, agree in advance how I'll take part and what I'll hand over.
Running the test myself
I redesigned the session around what this test found, and I'm running it myself. That's its own case: 07b · Running the redesigned test →
What carried forward
Then → Now
Then: Paper personas and storyboards were slow to change. Now: I prototype digitally from the start, as in the clickable screens for my own marketplace.
Then → Now
Then: I learnt DVF (desirable, viable, feasible) testing in class. Now: I aim every test at the most valuable assumption the idea's value rests on, as with the Room Fit Review demand tracker.