Contact Name:

Contact e-mail address:

Reference name for project (please do not use the real name, so that the form can remain unclassified)

Reason for assessment (using this form)

HS.2.6 User Involvement

Purpose : To effectively involve and consult users on each significant aspect of the system.

Successful outcomes:

    1. The need for user involvement is identified and accepted by the project.
    2. Representative users are selected and made available in sufficient numbers and in a timely fashion.
    3. User involvement is widespread and effective.
    4. The resulting changes to the system are reported back to the users.

For each of the activities below please select one of the following options:

No No - this doesn't happen

Partially This happens occasionally but there is no consistency

Largely Yes this usually happens

Fully This is recognised as the way we do business

Activity

N

P

L

F

1. A full range of stakeholders and users are involved.

2. User champions and representatives are identified and known to the design team.

3. Management provides support for the involvement of representative users (as well as user representatives) in the design process.

4. Human-system issues and aspects of design that require user input are identified.

5. The barriers to effective user involvement are reviewed (e.g. availability, becoming out of date, length of involvement).

6. The involvement of users is planned.

7. The range and types of users to be involved is planned.

8. The most effective methods for involving users are selected.

9. The options for short-terms and continuing user involvement are considered.

10. Interpretation of user input is made.

11. User input is fed back to the users for checking.

12. The design changes made as a consequence of user input are fed back to users.

13. Users are able to point out where user input is not being considered.

14. Users are able to point out where the design is diverging from user requirements.

 

Questions about the questionnaire: Yes No Comments
Were the questions relevant?
Were the questions easy to understand?

ŠLR 2001