Usability Evaluation Report for Interactive System: IMAT5209

This report presents a usability evaluation of the website http://www.flaine.com/, which is used for booking vacation spots. The evaluation employs a heuristic methodology, focusing on aspects such as registration, search functionality, payment processes, portfolio management, and login procedures. The report identifies key usability issues, including excessive multimedia, language translation errors, inadequate search result descriptions, lack of online booking, and inflexible search filters. It provides detailed recommendations for improvements, such as streamlining the interface, enhancing search capabilities, and incorporating online booking functionality. The evaluation involves a two-phase process, including evaluator briefings and problem recording, and it concludes with specific findings and suggestions to enhance the user experience and overall system usability.

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design1
Human Interaction In-System Design
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................3
1.1 Key findings.................................................................................................................................3
1.2 Recommendations........................................................................................................................4
2 Introduction.........................................................................................................................................5
3 Interactive System and Users...............................................................................................................5
4 Use Cases............................................................................................................................................6
5 Usability Requirements.......................................................................................................................8
6 Evaluation Methodology....................................................................................................................10
6.1 List of heuristics.........................................................................................................................10
6.2 Selection of Evaluators..............................................................................................................11
6.3 Briefing the Evaluators..............................................................................................................11
6.4 First Evaluation Phase..............................................................................................................11
6.5 Second Evaluation Phase...........................................................................................................12
6.6 Record problems........................................................................................................................12
6.7 Debriefing session.....................................................................................................................12
7 Evaluation..........................................................................................................................................12
8 Findings.............................................................................................................................................16
9 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................17
References.................................................................................................................................................19

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design3
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is usability on the http://www.flaine.com/ website which offers a platform for
users to get vacation spots. The company uses the website above to get most of its services
online. It is however noted that the system lacks some usability requirements hence the
consultant was used to identify those usability issues with possible recommendations.
1.1 KEY FINDINGS
i. the site is full of unnecessary multimedia which has covered most part of the website
making it difficult for the users to identify the key elements which are under the website
to fulfill their functionality.
ii. their some translations are done on the system which is not available on the Google
translation hence prone to errors due to language mismatches.
iii. The search results are not quite descriptive to give the full details of the vacation spot
being sort after. This inadequate information limits the user ability to finish the
reservations
iv. it was found out that the system is missing the online booking option and instead have
the booking option made via phone call and email, this limits the usability of the system
since it is critical for users to have self-booking capabilities enabled into the system.
v. the search results are not flexible as it lacks the filters option to enable the user drill down
into the required item which he/she seeks. This leads to wastage of time on the user side

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design4
1.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
i. Combination of the logo and the picture into one or simply used a logo instead.
ii. Use a more descriptive tagline
iii. There is a need to increase the font size and following on the general menu conventions
to enhance the look and feel
iv. There is a need to replace the existing with a search bar for accommodation which yields
with it recommended options based on the search
v. There is a need to change the style of the items in the footer section
vi. There is a need to include a maximum of three option for accommodation in the menu.
vii. A search facility should be included for more useful searched
viii. need to have a better description.
ix. Need to remove the photos from the menu because they are extremely tiny hence not
helpful for the foreigners
x. Replacement of the drop-box for accommodation with a better side menu
xi. Addition of advanced search options
xii. There is a need to include a more structured description with key attributes such as The
vacation spot price, locale, number of available spots within the location
xiii. Make efforts to have the results sorted based on the price and location
xiv. There is a need to provide online booking functionality

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design5
2 INTRODUCTION
This report is about the conduct of the usability requirement on booking website
http://www.flaine.com/ which is used by tourist all over the world to get better vacation spots.
This website shall form the subject of the report on its usability components based on the human-
computer interaction body of language.
The first section of the report intrudes the system and the users based on the user interaction
components which are critical for the report. The second section outlines the system user causes
by providing in brief the functionalities of the system. This shall be useful in the subsequent
section which outlines the usability requirements.
The methodology used in carrying out the evaluation is also detailed in this section. Finally,
the actual evaluation done together with the findings is documented in the last section. The
conclusion which summarises the key take ways from the usability shall be given in the
conclusion section (Solano, Rusu, Collazos, & Arciniegas, 2013)
3 INTERACTIVE SYSTEM AND USERS
The system under study is an e-commerce website with the URL http://www.flaine.com/.
The website provides the users with the ability to search for lucrative vacation spots, view the
details of the offers and make the necessary arrangements to have the spot booked for them. The
users of the system include the tourists, the tour guides and the hotel owners who regularly use
the system to have their daily activities done over the platform (Sim & Read, 2016).
The tourists use it for making reservations while the tourist's officers use it to manage the
bookings. The hotel owner uses it to provide accommodation services displayed for users. The

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design6
level of system usability is therefore of paramount importance in the operation of the system and
make the website and application more interactive to the users. It is in this regard that the
usability evaluation is conducted to check the level of interactivity the site offers (Sim, 2009)
4 USE CASES
The actors on the scene for the system under investigation include the tourist, the vacation
spot owners, the tourist officers, admin. Both have their specific use cases detailed in the table
below;
Actor Use case
Customer -Register
-Login
-View Profile and Gallery
-Check vacation spot
availability
-Make reservation
-Make payments
-Cancel a reservation
-Search vacation spots
Tourist Officer -Register

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design7
-Login
-Views Vacations
-View Reservations
-Update Vacation Spots
-Confirm Payments
-Search vacation spots
Vacation Spot owners -Register
-Login
-Search vacation for spot
-View Payment details
-Confirm Vacations
-Update gallery
-Cancel a reservation
-Search potential spots
Admin -Register
-Login
-Manage Users

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design8
-Update permissions
-Update Roles
-Assign roles
-Assign Permissions
The above use cases shall be used to check the usability requirements for this report.
5 USABILITY REQUIREMENTS
Based on the above use cases, the report has identified the following usability requirements
that will be evaluated for the above application whether they achieve the usability requirements
and matrixed stated below (Scholtz, Calitz, & Haupt, 2018).
First, the system should allow the users to easily register on the system on self mode without
any errors. To measure this attribute, the number of inexperienced users who will register on the
site per hour basis shall be recorded during the usability evaluation. The number of errors will be
matrixed per users (Zaharias & Koutsabasis, 2012). If the number of errors is below 2 errors per
hour, this requirement shall be passed otherwise, it will be a failure on the system to provide this
usability requirement. The users who will be tested for this requirement include the customer
user, the vacation spot owners, the tourist officers, and the admin user accounts (Saeed, Ali,
Shahid, Iqbal, & Hafeez, 2019).
The second usability requirement is that the customer should be able to search the vacation
spot that filter down to their key requirements and the results from this search should encompass

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design9
the cost, customer preference and the similar vacation spots that match the user search matrix. To
measure this, the number of the search result that meets the user's requirements shall be recorded
during the study. If the number is more than 10 per user, then we can say the requirement has
been met, otherwise, it is a failure on this part. The key user who will be under investigation is
the customer user account (Pribeanu, Marinescu, Iordache, & Gheorghe-Moishi, 2010).
Third, the payment processes shall be another usability requirement and the system should
provide an array of payment options that are verifiable and not prone to mistakes. To measure
this, the number of successful payments without any errors shall be recorded and used as the
matrix to gauge the system level of usability with regards to payment options. If the number of
successful payments exceeds 20 per hour during the evaluation, then it will be safe to say the
usability requirement is met, otherwise it shall have failed on this front (Pribeanu, 2017). The
key used for this usability is the customer account who normally initiates the payment process
for the site (Tiffany, Blasi, Catz, & McClure, 2018).
The fourth usability requirement under evaluation is portfolio management. The vacation
spot owner should be able to regularly update their vacation spot images gallery and portfolio
without much technical know-how. This will be measured by the evaluation team ability to
update the vacation spots image galleries and portfolio. The matrix for this is the number of
unsuccessful image updates. If the unsuccessful updates exceed 2 for each test, then it is
considered a failure on the requirement (Pribeanu, 2014). The hotel owner user will be used in
this evaluation
Last but not least, the login use case shall be put under the usability test. The key
requirement is used are supposed to be logged into successfully provided they input their details
correctly and the system should prompt them of any unsuccessful attempts to log in. The

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design10
remember password button should be able to remember the user for the given time frame that is
reasonable. To check this requirement, the matrix of the successful logins shall be recorded and
the remember me password duration recorded. If the those successfully logged in with the
remember me the password is more than 20, then it is a pass for the requirement, otherwise, it is
a failure (Shih, Huang, & Chen, 2013).
Once the requirements are stated, the evaluation designed the methodology that will be used
to get the results of the requirements (Muhanna, Amro, & Qusef, 2018). The methodology is
described in the below
6 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
The evaluation methodology used for this usability evaluation was the heuristic evaluation
methodology. The processed for the methodology includes the following seven phases processed
that help the evaluation team conduct the evaluation of the web site and applications.
6.1 LIST OF HEURISTICS
This phase involves the listing of all the heuristics based on Nielsen’s 10 heuristic usability
evaluation scheme. This enables the evaluators to have a base from which to conduct the
evaluation of the system. The different heuristics will be used for the different usability
requirements under evaluation (Inal, 2018)
6.2 SELECTION OF EVALUATORS
The second phase involved the selection of key evaluators who are to be involved in the
whole evaluation exercise. The evaluators are drawn from the company’s pool of experts who
have a long-standing history in their relevant fields (Demetis & Lee, 2018). The team of

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design11
evaluators is carefully selected to ensure they are not the users of the system under investigation
as this may Claude their judgment. It is the ideal requirement for the company to ensure only the
domain experts work on a particular work (Hasan, 2013)
6.3 BRIEFING THE EVALUATORS
The next phase is the briefing of the evaluators on the current task at hand. This briefing
includes the team being made familiar with the system under evaluation, the usability
requirements under evaluation and the general domain with which they are about to work on.
The team is then subdivided into different sub-teams with each team focusing on a particular
aspect of the system with the guidance of the (Erenler, 2018).
6.4 FIRST EVALUATION PHASE
The evaluation phase involves a two hours’ evaluation of the whole system with the
identification of the key elements, which and a high-level identification of the key elements that
are to be investigated by the team (Dembitzer, Zelikovitz, & Kettler, 2017).
6.5 SECOND EVALUATION PHASE
This phase involves the deep dive into the actual usability requirements established by the
team in the initial stages of the investigation. This includes the detailed evaluation of the web
sites and the given uses cases (Davids, Chikte, & Halperin, 2013).

Running head: Human Interaction In System Design12
6.6 RECORD PROBLEMS
This phase involves each evaluation team recording the problems they have identified with
regard to the usability requirements established earlier. Each team should have a detailed and
specific problem conducted on each item they are working on (Brown & Hyung Nam Kim,
2018).
6.7 DEBRIEFING SESSION
The debrief session involves the teams meeting to have a collaborative approach to
combining the key findings made from the evaluation. The results will be a key part of the
recommendation done to the company whose website is under usability investigation (Baloyi,
Ojo, & Van Wyk, 2017).
7 EVALUATION
7.1 EVALUATION PROCEDURE
The Heuristic evaluation was conducted on the system, and the following key evaluation
was done as per the requirements of the heuristic evaluation.
Violated Heuristics Problem found Suggested Improvements
Documentation -The logo and the picture
which is placed on the top
takes too much of the website
space.
-Combination of the logo and
the picture into one or simply
used a logo instead.
-Use a more descriptive
tagline