Goals

This research focused on discovering how employees feel about their current experience (working from home and on campus) and how technology, AI, and the built et could better suit their specific needs.

‍

Surface common themes around users’ (EwD) experiences and expectations within a physical workplace.  

• What are common problems or barriers users face when coming into the office?   

• What demotivates them from coming into the office? What is missing to help their experience in-office?  

• What accommodations do they expect to or want to have in-office? (digital or campus-related)  

• What does their routine consist of when preparing to come into the office? What information do they need to prepare?  

• What is their typical user flow when coming to the office and setting themselves up for a successful work day?  

Determine users’ (EwD)  preferences when it comes to self-identification, privacy, and safety.  

• What identification do users want to see on their profile, if any?  

• What privacy and/or safety concerns do users have regarding their profile?   

• What would help users feel valued at their workplace? (physical, spatial, technological, community)  

Explore how AI can support accessible work experiences.  

• How can technology be used to support in-office and hybrid work models?  

• How can AI be used to improve aspects of their experience?   

• What are the benefits and/or barriers when using AI technology?   

‍

Roles and Responsibilities

Stakeholders

• Key stakeholders of this project were mainly the UX research and design team within MSD, but also included the director of employee experiences and VP of the department for larger share-outs and ‘buy-in’ for the research proposal and expected outcomes. 
• Other stakeholders included people from inclusive research departments, recruitment, HR and privacy boards with logistic-focused work.

‍

Collaborators

• I was the lead researcher on this project, responsible for developing and executing a foundational research study for employee experience, in addition to outlining accessibility-focused UX practices, and creating additional documentation and templates to use for methods and accessibility reviews.
•  worked closely with designers and accessibility experts from different departments in the company, includingsome text
  • A senior designer who is involved in accessibility initiatives across the org, and who has worked with previous researchers who have tried to implement a similar foundational study. His experience and connections in the company were invaluable in helping drive this project forward, and in providing context to my questions at the beginning of the project. 
  • I identified an opportunity and created a partnership between a member of a Global Workplace Services department to leverage both our efforts on accessible workplace experiences. Her work focuses mainly on the built environment and we were able to work together to identify opportunities and challenges across digital and in-person experiences based on our knowledge and the research being done in respective departments.  

• Weekly updates were completed with key stakeholders and collaborators throughout the project, to share progress, challenges, and plans for upcoming sprints. 

‍

Process

The proposed study was multi-methodological, with the intention of building a baseline understanding of accessibility accommodations, workspace considerations, and personal preferences of persons with disabilities in the workspace. This work would help frame future feature integrations and updates so that the physical/digital working environment is more inclusive. 

‍

Desk Research

In order to develop a comprehensive foundational study and proposal, I looked at all existing accessibility research done within the MSD department (internal-facing products), reviewed company-wide accessibility and/or inclusivity research and initiatives, and combined them into an insights deck as a repository for future research projects. 

Additionally, I reviewed market competitors who are leading in accessibility and inclusive workplace approaches, who have scored high on a number of accessibility recognition sites, and in general, what makes a workplace “accessible”. 

The desk research was shared with the research team and key stakeholders (product owners, designers), to spread awareness of the current state of accessibility research in the department. Insights from the research directly informed the research proposal and what the research objectives were based on any challenges or gaps in information. 

‍

Foundational Project Proposal 

The proposal and its methods were based on existing research that was done on accessibility and working environments. Insights gathered previously were compiled into a resource deck to inform this foundational study. The proposed study included the following methods: 

• Market Review 

• Accessible AI review 

• Physical Campus Review 

• Inclusive Research Survey (internal facing employees with a disability) 

• Focus Groups (internal facing employees with a disability) 

• Accessibility & AI Design Sprint (Places and Campus Experiences stakeholder group) 

Each method was planned for- and designed to build off of one anoher, to provide a more wholistic understanding of the accessibility considerations and employee experiences at Microsoft. Each method was broken down into its key components, expected number of participants, participant profiles, and expected timelines/outcomes. The chart below provides a high level capture of the details provided to stakeholders within the proposal.

This proposal was shared out with VP+, directors, Product managers, and respective design, engineering, and research teams. The proposal gained traction and recognition across departments for the value it would provide not only to employees with a disability, but also the general employee population across their campuses.

‍

Mapping out the Accessible UX Process

A document was developed to provide a guideline for planning and executing UXR related to accessibility, inclusive design, and persons with disabilities. These principles can be applied to general user groups as well, but the intention of this document was to support future UX researchers and to provide a guideline for incorporating inclusive research practices to their work. The document covered the following sections:

• Planning (how to build a proposal, identifying stakeholders and stakeholder management, share-out best practices, and desk research practices)
• Methodology (choosing an inclusive method, how to choose between quantitative, qualitative, or mixed method approaches, considerations for inclusive research methods and execution, participant and AT considerations)
• Participant Recruitment (how to select testing and recruitment methods available within Microsoft (internal vs. external), project approval processes, tips and learnings from recruitment and approval process)
• Running Inclusive Studies (remote/in-person, assistive tools/accommodations, time commitment, data collection, tips and tricks)
• Share-out Recommendations (Compiling data and feedback (QN and QL), demonstrating value of engagement often and early on, building a case and value for accessibility research/design processes)
• Retrospectives (Purpose, When to conduct a retrospective, Examples of questions/prompts, How to action retrospective takeaways)
• Additional Resources (internal, external, industry standards and guidelines)

‍

Deliverables

There were several unforeseen challenges that delayed progress on the foundational study. Although we were unable to complete all methods proposed, I was able to set-up and/or deliver the following:

• Desk and Market research deck (for current researchers to use for digital and in-person workplace research)
• Foundational Research Proposal (deck and formal report used for share-outs and as a guide for future researchers to use)
• Accessible UX process document (for current and future UX researchers to reference)
• Methodology breakdowns (templates, recruitment processes, analysis outlines)
• Final Report share-out template to use once data has been completed
• Retrospective with HR and Approval boards to discuss a more efficient process

‍

Outcomes

While this project was unable to progress as intended, there was significant buy-in from the beginning of the project by Director, VP and C-suite stakeholders. Because of this, this project will continue once timelines and resources are aligned.

During my time at Microsoft, I was able to deliver reports, templates, and resources that will be used for this project once more resources can be assigned to it.

‍

Learnings & Takeaways

This project produced many learnings in how to best manage a project, stakeholders, and the importance of efficient processes.

• Project management was important throughout this contract --I was able to effectively identify roles and responsibilities of collaborators, build partnerships for efficient workflows, demonstrate value of the project with stakeholders, and continuously adapt to new challenges by adapting my workflow and project deliverables.
• Stakeholder management was very important throughout this project as the focus went from building out the project proposal and research project, to effectively managing the approval processes and key stakeholders who could help move this project forward. To do so, part of my role became identifying and managing stakeholders who could move the project along, and give approvals in the correct order. To do so, I made a document to track progress (who needs to do what, when, and what had been done) to effectively outline a new approval process for the department.
• After this process was completed, I conducted a retrospective workshop will all key players in the approval process for research, specifically research involving employees with a disability, to finalize the approval process for future projects and to discuss challenges faced within this project. We were able to discuss key learnings and takeaways and I could then finalize a report for my manager and director that could be referenced once this project begins in the future.