Mini Case Study: Airport Check-Ins
A faded set of dark circles can be seen under my slightly opened eyes along with a pair of dragging feet as I attempt to get to my gate after being briskly hurried out of the car. In my head, swarming are thoughts of endless chores and tasks that I need to complete before the week’s end. Approaching the gate, I went to the familiar grouping of kiosks, while some greener travelers approach it with uncertainty. As my ticket printed quickly, I did a few quick turns searching the entrance to the luggage drop off. Brimming with annoyance as I have to take care not trip over luggage on the floor, wondering why people are just idly standing around in way. I felt a surge of emotion creeping up on me, a familiar lingering feeling but decided to ignore it and push onward. As I’m doing the NYC shuffle to the gate I finally had time to think more deeply about the process I just went through and it clicked: bad user experience.
We have all been through it one way or another. Either with apps, websites, buying a product, playing a game, toys, electronics, etc there have been a wide variety of things that had frustrated us at times when we feel it should have been simpler. The person that created the user interactions or interface had not understood their audience nor their behaviors. Thankfully it's not always a sink or swim situation, so we can learn from our mistakes and improve the product. Only if you aren't in denial that there is indeed room for improvement. I feel like “user experience” goes further beyond than just a digital interface and should take a human-centered approach.
Hot hubs like airports are one of those places that have so much potential for designers. So much room for input that can improve its existing ecosystem. Don’t get me wrong, there have definitely been some advances over the years including customer service but other times you wonder . . . who had actually signed off on some obviously bad processes with their stamp approval?
Objectives
Thoughts can be like fleeting moments. Thinking of something exciting . . only to be carried off by the wind into an endless void. Not even remembering what wonderful idea you were just tantalizing about. A feeling just barely there like on the tip of the tongue.
Instead of having them escape from me like clockwork, this is what came about. Due to time constraints and external forces, most of us feel in our daily lives, I decided to do a mini-series of sorts instead of a thorough and detailed case study. I made a goal to have something achievable and realistic to aim for. Better something than nothing, right? So you can think of it like a guerilla “design sprint”, giving a small insight into my design thinking in trying to fix the minor design problems I encounter in this world.
The Problem
To be able to really see the current problem with airport check-ins, you have to see at its busiest time of the year. The time it takes to complete the whole process is less concerning to me, than the actual flow of the process. Since the actual length of time will depend on the person ahead of you and other variables out of our control. So here I will focus what we can (could) control, and that is the overall layout with the check-in process. Trying to eliminate what can be a minor frustration for anyone, especially to the workers whom I bet would like to avoid an angry mob. Even though there is no shortage of problems at an airport. But let’s just focus on this one!
So this entire process was so dysfunctional. You can see the attempt to organize but felt like someone had said “Oh this looks good enough, this makes sense to me. Done!”. As this example goes, the first step (kiosk) was slapped in the middle, trying to get the most optimize use of space of people coming in from all directions. Which makes sense! But not if you’re checking luggage, there is no clear distinction to the next step especially if you’re on the end closest to the ropes you would definitely have had a long time to see the next step. Also not to mention having to figuratively step over people, and no use of prominent visual hierarchy seen anywhere. Even after you complete all the steps, you kind end up in the middle or further away from the Gate which can add on to even more confusion of an already stressful day. There is no sense of flow. If you are in a hurry, every second count in a high-intensity situation.
Not a problem you can particularly notice if there are only a handful of people. Though, that optimal situation I feel is what created a nonfunctional environment like this in the first place, even though they should be designed to remove anxiety and not add to it.
Location
U.S.A, Newark Liberty Airport, United Airlines, Terminal C, end of corridor
Variables
Early Morning, Christmas holiday, massive crowds, winter season
Extra Notes
I picked this particular location since it was the most recent experience I went through. I didn’t document my previous experiences since I didn’t think about creating an article at the time. I’m also aware of multiple airports, airlines and possible cross-checking with all varieties of existing kiosk check-in layouts, but alas due to time constraints and resources I will focus only at this location. But keep an open mind that even worse or better check-in layout cases do exist out there.
Defining Goals
Not the most exciting thing that comes to mind when one thinks of an organic human-centric UX problem but it’s something that will be there for a very long time even after the entire process gets fully automated there would still be needed for direction to get humans through that process without congestion or chaos.
- Clear distinction in hierarchy
- Avoid unnecessary congestion
- Cut down time wasting, Don’t Make Me Think! mindset
User Research
At times, it’s like they put so much cost into implementing new technology, that the actual human experience is all but taken a back seat. Which is understandable from a business perspective but that’s why every decision concerning human interaction should always be a team made of many departments and not just one-sided. You can make use of an affinity diagram at this point.
Even though I won’t be noting here any actual live data from the airport like cross references of other airlines check-ins, # of flights, # of boarding pass only, # of boarding pass & baggage check-ins, # of passengers here compared to other check-ins on the same floor, check-in station in relation to Gate, . .etc (I could go on for pages) it’s good to keep in mind on all possible data we would need if conducting an actual thorough research when trying to figure out the best possible solution even when its just for something simple like checking-in. Here though I am going to stick with the quick and dirty guerilla research from friends/family’s experience and my own.
Generic Personas:
Type: Family (4)
Age: 2 Adults, 2 (lively)children
Senario: Print boarding pass, Checking in luggage
Nationality: American
Traveling To: Florida
Travels: 4–6 times a year
Type: Solo
Age: Adult
Senario: Boarding Pass only
Nationality: American
Traveling To: California
Travels: 1–2 times a year
Both parties have a similar goal in mind, and none of it is worrying about whether or not the layout of check-ins are the most efficient. Just like any application, they expect it to just work for their immediate needs. If there is a high percentage of users running into the same problems, it’s not their fault right, that’s our job to find a working (lasting) solution.
The general feeling and emotion towards the airline process is not great but it’s also not on the lowest end of the scale. Of course this emotion is mainly anchored to their current external situation that day with the internal situation at the airport. So it’s in constant flux. Some days we may feel we can put up with a lot bad experiences because there aren’t any other options. Doesn’t mean it should be neglected by the client or company. By minimizing the risk or tension for the flyers since in doing so would work in their favor for the long run. It’s understandable that Flyers (users) want immediate gratification since they are paying for a service, and it should be one of client’s objective’s to try to fulfill that need.
Since their is also a lot of emotion and external forces in work here it would be always good at this point to add depth to that behavioral analysis. After user personas are completed, you can also conduct one-in-one interviews
- How long does it approximately take you to get to the airport?
- When you arrive, do you feel instructions are very clear?
- Would you prefer to check-in luggage? If not, is there a specific reason.
- How would you describe your initial emotion when entering through the door?
Here you want to find the “emotional triggers” to help you with the messaging strategy, emotional targeting, and the ux/ui design.
How does this help us with the the current problem?
Well depending on how in depth the line of questioning is this can confirm that a problem does indeed exist. This priceless data is your pellets to your slingshot, it’s practically gold. Not only can it be used as proof to investors or clients on changes needed that can lead to increase revenue/satisfaction, but once you have this it can be used towards all aspects of UX at the Airport. Happy customers can lead to increase in loyalty. Which is every advertiser’s wet dream. Bluntly, the hardest part I feel about any client project is getting the brand/company to see and admit to any flaws. Which is why testing and research are so important before anything.
I’m sure no one even considered the importance of how cows should be herded but a solution by Temple Grandin that seemed so miniscule actually made a massive change in the livestock industry forever. Increasing their productivity and reducing stress while improving health. Totally not comparing humans to cattle, but just pointing out it’s another good example of underestimated UX problems overall but for livestock.
Customer Journey
What is the journey that takes this family or solo flier through the check-in process? Always a good idea to write everything out, never leave things to be based upon assumptions. That road always leads to disaster. Here let’s just make a very generic roadmap of this customer journey for those that didn’t print out a boarding pass ahead of time.
Here is showing the journey greatly condensed with the action, the thinking, then the possible feelings attached to that action. With keeping that information in mind we can do the following diagrams which show both journeys of our personas example. As you can start to see here in a rush hour scenario with the Family group (pink dots) how easily the family good is in the middle of outgoing traffic from the 2nd and 3rd section and on top of stress trying not to lose your children in the process.
Then here you can view the other persona type, the solo passenger, which can still feel entrapped in this crowd but at least does not have to worry about checking in any luggage or a need to see customer service.
Design Decisions
Getting down to the nitty-gritty. I’m sure some people might be wondering, why is it important to know where people come from? Well since we are focusing on direction and flow, we should make sure this makes sense to our audience. To simplify things for this exercise, we made both groups American and the location is at Newark airport. So we know already people raised on this side of the world mainly read from left to right whereas other parts of the world their right to left is more dominant. In American society, we are constantly hammered with this concept even our driver seat is on the left, and exits are mainly on the right. Even the conveyor belt at the check-in goes left to right! So why not keep the flow towards the right, keeping with that nurtured instinct.
Looking at the above example, you can see the possible directional paths for each flyer and the oncoming chaos those paths could create. Even for an airline worker, been thrown into the midst of this chaos can also be stressful. This situation is helping no one really. I can understand the initial reasoning of having the kiosk centered but that same reason is bad because it leads to too many entry points, too many paths overlapping each other. Why go against the grain. Need to seek the direction with less resistance.
So then since we are more familiar with a left to right flow so then the hierarchy should follow the same. Now the question is where to place “customer service”? It’s not really a mandated step in the journey. As only an option or a wild card, as you might say, It’s something that can be needed first or even last. We need to find a placement that is the most efficient.
Use Of Space
So since we know we need hierarchy from left to right, we can try that in a literal sense having it lined up 1–3 right across. So this could work as the Kiosk section is open-ended still to allow entrance from angles and not overlapping the other sections but also being close to a gate entrance if not checking in luggage. Still, we lose some airline counter space, may not as much as a sacrifice, depends on how much traffic you get in this area. The 2nd exit and 3rd section entrance paths are too close to each other and can intersect, even if you swing over the entrance to the 3rd line to the right you can still end up with a cluster of folks walking into each other.
Split Decision
Let’s move the kiosk to the front center then while utilizing all the space in the back. This can help take advantage of all counter space for workers while keeping the foot traffic to the outside of the perimeter so not to overlap. When lines are more restricted, you can see a clearer interrupted path. There will always be lines but at least it will be a controlled chaos, and the lengths of those lines would be determined by the front desks and airline helpers including clear signage throughout. The layout is a bit more uninformed now, but now anyone that needs to switch between sections 2 & 3 will have an extremely long distance to walk. Even though there is now that inconvenience of walking to the other side, that will only effect that group and not the people that don’t need to switch whom will be now closest to the gate entrance. So now we would need to see the data between those two groupings to decide if their is a higher percentage of people switching then not switching to modify that layout.
Three Ducks In A Row
Going back to the flow of direction, from the data we do have it shows people will instinctively go to the right as we tend to look to the right as well. Also noting that this area is at the end of a corridor, there is already another gate to the left of this. If we have all check-in area’s flow to the right, then each section is aligned with at least one gate. We can even angle kiosk towards the user for easier access and exit. Maybe even shortcut for the 3rd section, to have a solution to shorten the distance to the 2nd section but for those completed with their tasks can just move to the left to get to the gate.
Best Scenario
But with that said, having all the all lines entry points to one side may cause congestion. At this point, I wouldn’t mind modifying a little bit and have a mixture of diagrams 1.7 and 1.8, keeping the customer service smaller and to the left side. Also dominating the check-in area by ropes then free space, decreases the likelihood of any passengers idly standing around in the way.
SIGNAGE
Just a quick say on another, if not equally an important factor for this user experience is the graphic design with this space. Like in any installation, placement and hierarchy are key. Even if we get the flow and direction down, it has to be accompanied by the correct signage that will grab the user’s attention from the moment they arrive. Don’t make them guess. This can be another great opportunity to conduct study groups to observe what works and doesn’t work with all age groups.
Current signage I saw was either too small or not clearly distinctive. I saw numbers but they were attached from the ground so as a short person I almost didn't even notice from afar with people in the way. Maybe possibly making use of the ceiling and have bigger number hang from there can definitely be seen from any angle. If numbers aren’t clear enough then also adding iconic imagery to them can be useful as well. There are some signage as well with too much text, or even too little are hard to read if not in a big enough size for someone walking by quickly.
In dealing with human direction, you can really not have enough arrows. The more obvious the better. I would treat it almost similar to how highway signage and road directions are designed. They could make use of the floors and ceilings. In other parts of the airport, you can see good displays for directions. It shouldn’t be neglected in the check-in area.
“The problem isn’t how to make the world more technological. It’s about how to make the world more humane again.” ― John Maeda
Reflections
Over time a course of time, when something is consistent, humans can instinctively know where to go in the area without second-guessing. We are indeed creatures of habit, we should strive to make layout’s consistent within countries. There is already proof we can adapt to poor designs, like the already existing check-ins but imagine the efficiency levels that can be increased if made in the correct way. Maybe a minuscule difference to the CEO’s when crunching the numbers but the passengers would feel it, even if they aren’t aware of it themselves. But isn’t that the best human-centered design? When it’s so easy and functional, that there is not even a second guessing as to what they are doing at that moment. As designer’s, don’t we strive to smooth out those hectic moments in life?
If you have read this far, you can then begin to see this is just the tip of the iceberg on perfecting this check-in layout, as this idea can lead down to so many possibilities. I wanted to give in much insight into this as possible, as this is quite an exciting problem to solve but without actual data, I can’t know how it will affect which lines. Like what could be shorter and what can go where. At this specific terminal, there is only United, for instance, so you can even do live A/B testing throughout the entire floor!
At times, it’s like they put so much money into implementing new technology, like kiosks, that the human experience is all but taken a back seat. They forget about the customer’s who actually need to go through the experience to board a plane. There are so many complications in running an airport, so it’s understandable when the little things are overlooked. At the same time though, I can’t see how no one thought this would be important. Look at lines at a convention, sport’s stadium, DMV, even to a dance club. Without some order, things can go from calm to chaotic in a heartbeat. In a time when tensions are high, you don’t want to add fuel to the fire.
Recommendations:
Interaction Design Foundation : Affinity Diagrams — Learn How to Cluster and Bundle Ideas and Facts
Temple Grandin: Livestock Behaviour, Design of Facilities
William Edwards Deming: Statistical Product Quality Administration, Points on Quality Management
This is my first attempt at publishing my ongoing thoughts in article form. This was an incredibly hard writing exercise for me. Not sure if this is even a topic that would interest anyone, but as there are infinite number of stars I’m sure there is someone out there who just might. Please forgive any run on-sentences or grammatical errors on my part. I aim to steadily improve my writing and storytelling skills as a designer.
