Empowering recreational hikers to be prepared for non life threatening wilderness injuries by creating a product that is customizable, easy to maintain and intuitive to use.
Project Motivation
The focus of our team’s research topic is developing an improved wilderness first aid toolkit. We have explored and researched different opportunities related to our research topic and decided on an opportunity statement: “Empowering recreational hikers to be prepared for non-life threatening wilderness injuries by creating a product that is customizable, easy to maintain and intuitive to use.”
We began this process by identifying the primary SET (Social, Economic, Technological) factors and stakeholders. We were able to uncover various opportunities and, by using design methods, were able to filter the top opportunities and select one that our team believes to be the most appropriate. The following is a summary of how we arrived at our proposed opportunity.
SET Factors
Stakeholders
Our primary customer is backpackers. However, we aim to market and provide value to any and all outdoors enthusiasts and travelers that would benefit from our product. Outside of this subset, the important stakeholders are bloggers (or those who market outdoor gear), distributors (retail brands such as REI), and manufacturers of outdoor goods.
To identify our customers and key stakeholders, we went through a 2x2 matrix evaluation that compared relative risk to relative amount of gear necessary for certain sports. We could then start to (1) gauge which activity we would primarily base our design on, which became backpackers, and (2) ensure we keep perspective on the range of user needs and opportunities. Ideally, we aim to attend users across the spectrum to provide extensive value in the context of wilderness first aid.
We chose backpackers, as they were closest to the center for risk and gear and could be categorized from novice to expert. In this way, we could also attend to one of our main design goals which was to have a product that is useful for both amateurs and seasoned explorers.
POG (Product Opportunity Gap) Generation
To generate product opportunities, our team conducted interviews. One trend that we noticed was our interviewees described creating their own first aid kit as well as adding in missing components to their first aid kits that they saw as appropriate for their own type of adventuring/outdoor sport. This inspired us to write POGs that used words such as modular, adaptable and customizable. Many of our interviewees described feeling unsafe in the outdoors when they were lost or didn’t know how to get help right away. Due to this, we also created POGs that were related to better tracking and location technology for backpackers and hikers.
POG Selection
Last, to arrive to our final statement, we utilized a series of filtering techniques to narrow the list of POGs. We each individually grouped POGs into similar themes. These POGs were then fed into two rounds of weighted matrix evaluation, which further helped to narrow down to 3 POGs. The criteria we evaluated with were:
After discussing as a group, we decided to prioritize the first two criteria (project feasibility and excitement from team).
Our collective group excitement about a more physical product led us to our final opportunity statement:
“Empowering recreational hikers to be prepared for non-life threatening wilderness injuries by creating a product that is customizable, easy to maintain and intuitive to use.”
Design Journey
Understanding the Opportunity
User Research Methods
Our user research methods consisted of 1:1 interviews, user observations and empathy research. We also performed walk-throughs using low fidelity prototypes. By asking users to walk through the last scenario in which they used their first aid kits, we were able to reconcile what people told us with what they actually did, and observe the potential pain points that they encountered.The insights gathered from this research was used to create the personas and journey map.
From our research, we concluded that:
(1) many users don’t know the tools available to them in their kits
(2) users value long lasting materials and reliability in their kits
(3) users value the ability to customize the components of their kits to tailor them to the specific needs of the activity, and
(4) users like the ability to replace things in their kits after use.
These insights helped to guide our evaluation of competitors and our crafting of product requirements.
Competitors and VOA (Value Opportunity Analysis)
In our review of potential competitors, we identified products that fell into 3 major categories: emergency rescue equipment (SPOT beacon), first aid kits (Adventure Medical Kits, EVERLIT), and individual emergency tools (SAM splint, emergency bivouac). From user interviews and observations, we concluded that the most common product used of these 3 categories was a first aid kit - specifically, the Adventure Medical Kits 0.5 Ultralight. We then crafted a VOA chart for this kit based on the interior contents, ultimately concluding that the company focused primarily on utility in packing as many safety products into as small a space as possible, but neglected ease of use in accessing and utilizing components of the kit.
Given these identified gaps, our team decided to focus primarily on: the ease of use or our product (the ability of a user to easily access and utilize key components of the kit), the re-usability of our product (the ability to restock and refill the kit, and know when supplies are running low), and the customizability of our product (the ability to tailor the kit to the activity that the user is participating in). Furthermore, a focus will also be placed on the environmental impact of our product - rather than relying on single use, individually packaged components, we will strive to encourage reuse through high quality materials and craftsmanship, as well as reliable technology that won’t fail over repeated uses.
Product Requirements
In order to find the main requirements we wanted for our product, we focused on the categories of VOA that we think are most important as explained above. Thus, our main themes are: the ease of use, the durability and the customizability of the product.
We then found these requirements to be especially important:
Concerning the ergonomics and the ease of use, the product MUST be easy to identify in a backpack and it MUST be easy to search through.
Focusing on the durability, we think users MUST be able to replace individual components of the product easily and they MUST be able to tell when to replace components.
Last but not least, customizability will also be one of the important categories, that’s why the product SHOULD provide space for users to add their own items and it MUST be adjustable according to the space remaining in the user's pack.
Concept Generation
To generate a robust list of concepts, we did a combination of individual brainstorming and group brainstorming. We generated 10+ concepts on our own, as well as using the 3-6-5 concept generation method and two 15 min concept generation sprints. The goal of each sprint was to conceive of as many ideas as possible in a 15 min time limit - a total of ~17 more ideas were generated as a result.
The team ended with a total of ~75 concepts. We created individual sketches for each of these concepts, and uploaded them to a Miro whiteboard. We then used the Miro whiteboard to conduct our concept grouping, selection and evaluation (described in subsequent sections). Some of these concepts were similar, and were more or less related - as discussed below, we combined many of these concepts as we filtered through them.
Concept Selection
As described above, we used a Miro whiteboard to conduct our concept grouping, selection and evaluation. First we created a 2x2 Matrix. We separated our items on a spectrum of “High Tech”/“Low Tech” and another that we called “Unified Items”/“Individual Items.” The horizontal axis was an attempt to capture the way that items were connected - if it was easy to take apart the individual compartments or if the compartments were placed more permanently in a certain location. We did not find that this helped us to navigate and understand the various concepts. Therefore, we attempted a different method.
We separated the concepts into groups based on form or functionality with labels such as "App for Tracking & Planning" or "Cylinder/ Hard Shell." Here we were better able to distinguish between similarities and differences of the different concepts. Using this type of grouping to visualize our concepts we then did Dot Voting to narrow down our selection to ~15 concepts. Then we used a modified Borda-Count method to further narrow down our concepts by ranking the concepts in three ways: Feasibility, Consumer Confidence (that we perceive) and Excitement (for us to prototype). We finished selecting 7 concepts to prototype.
Prototyping Activities
We implemented some rapid, rough and right prototypes. These ones allowed us to finalize our final selection and move forward to the next phase on our final concepts. Out of our original 7 concepts, we chose to prototype the 6 physical concepts (leaving the app idea out of this round of rough prototypes). Some of our concepts were the Inside Out Bag (A bag that flips inside out to expose interior pockets - easy to access once flipped, and easy to make waterproof) the Roll-Up Bag (A strip with pockets that rolls up to be packed away. When opened, the kit is laid flat and items can be clearly visible) and The Compartmentalized Ziplock (First aid kit that contains compartmentalized items in a bag you can open on either end). We first created rough paper prototypes and then moved on to higher fidelity prototypes. During the process of created many rapid prototypes, we learned gained valuable insights such as buildability, ease of finding items, ease of packing and unpacking. We also did more user observations with the prototypes and learned new valuable design requirements, such as the pockets must be see-through. We concluded that the Roll-Up Kit and a similar version called the Fold-Up kit would be the final designs to further explore with a high fidelity prototype.
Final Concept, Prototyping and Evaluation
Prototype 1 - Roll Up Kit
Our final design utilizes a main fabric base layer made of abrasion resistant, ripstop nylon, with waterproof plastic compartments of varying sizes sealed to the base. Once fully packed, the kit can be rolled up into a compact form factor, and secured using stretch cords on either end of the system.
Base Layer: The base layer is fabricated with 80D ripstop water resistant fabric, reinforced around the perimeter with integrated plastic shims that allow for compact rolling. This base layer both protects the internal components from other items in a backpack, and serves as a natural surface to lay the kit out on the ground.
Compartments: The clear plastic compartments can hold the same number of first aid components as the main competitor (Adventure Medical Kits 0.5 Ultralight), and can be customized to varying carrying capacities using internal velcro dividers. They are attached to the fabric baselayer in a way that allows them to be lifted up for quick, easy access. Furthermore, the pockets can be easily packed with first aid components, and do not rely on individualy packaged single use items.
Images depicting various angles of the Roll Up Kit - both alone and in comparison to the main compeitive commercial wilderness first aid kit.
The fabrication process of the system would be relatively straightforward at scale - given the small footprint of the fabric baselayer, scraps of ripstop fabric could be die cut to size and utilized for the main material. The reinforcements to the base layer could be either fabric welded or sewn in place, and the plastic components could be attached to the baselayer using the same fabrication processes.
Potential scale up manufacturing flow (blue boxes represent material inputs, yellow boxes represent fabrication steps).
In the case of the proof of concept, high fidelity prototype, common seam tape was used as a joining method, and reinforced Ziploc baggies were used as for the clear plastic compartments.
Prototype 2 - Fold Up Kit
In addition to the Roll Up Kit, we created a high fidelity prototype of a second concept - the Fold Up Kit. This system is designed to utilize the same materials and manufacturing processes as the Roll Up Kit. However, this system folds down the middle of the kit, and is secured in place using Velcro tabs (rather than stretch cords).
After fabricating this prototype, we decided not to pursue it further - the compactness and versatility of packability of the Roll Up Kit (it packed just as well in an ultralight trail running vest as it did in a overnight backpacking pack) made it a better choice for field testing.
Images of the Fold Up Kit.
A work in progress - action shots of our fabrication process.
Prototype Evaluation
To evaluate the prototype, a member of the team took the Roll Up Kit with him on an 7 mile group trail run in the Mt. Tamalpais wilderness. In addition to evaluating the fit, feel and function of the prototype himself, he gained feedback from his running group, many of whom had been interviewed at the start of the project for user input. The main takeaways from the interviews and experience are as follows:
Usability: The ease of use of the product was clear - in a mock scenario on the trail, the first aid kit was easily deployed, and the layout of the items (flat, spread out in various pockets) made finding the desired items fast and easy. Unrolling and rolling the kit was fast and intuitive, and the ability to spread the kit out on the ground while working was a major plus.
Packability: The kit was extremely compact - when rolled up, it fit easily into the back pocket of an ultralight running vest, and did not bounce or move around while running.
Refillability: The group members loved the size of the pockets, and agreed that it would be easier to refill the kit with off the shelf items than kits of comparable size. This was a major draw for many of the users.
"I would buy that in a heartbeat - can you make more?"
An evaluation of the product in comparison to a selection of key product requirements was conducted. However, in order to understand the full performance of the prototype, more time is required for user evaluation. More testing is certainly necessary - in both different settings, doing different activities, with different types of users. However, based on this initial testing, the feedback received was overwhelmingly positive.
Furthermore, a timing study was conducted to measure the amount of time taken to complete the most common use task (find a band aid and antibiotic ointment, as discovered during user interviews) in both the Roll Up Kit and the Adventure Medical Kits 0.5 Ultralight. The scenario was as follows:
The results of the tests showed a significant time decrease. In two separate user tests, users took roughly half as long to find the items detailed above using the Roll Up Kit in comparison to the 0.5 Ultralight (~1 minute 50 seconds for the 0.5 Ultralight, and ~40 seconds for the Roll Up Kit).
Continuing Development
The development of this product was relatively smooth - given the relatively narrow scope selected for the project, as well as the relative simplicity of the design, the time required to go from concept to usable, high fidelity prototype was relatively short. The main challenge in the project came in the form of understanding the materials that various users would want to include in kits - the sheer number of outdor activities, and the gear required to participate in the safely, made it hard to pick a target user group. To compromise on this, our group approached the problem with an extremely narrow view, electing to target the needs of users that would be going out on small day hikes/single night backpacking trips.
In the future, we would like to work to expand the capabilities of our kit - both technologically (incorporating more durable construction methods and materials, as well as designing add-on pockets for greater gear customization) and otherwise (expanding to incorporate more activities, and appeal to a wider base of user groups). Next steps, if we were to take them, would focus on further refining the design and manufacturability of the product, as well as continued user evaluation and testing. Additionally, we would put additional focus into creating a companion app, or similar user manual that explains how to use the kit. A potential design roadmap is as follows:
Given the time and scope constraints of the project, our team was extremely happy with the end result - regardless of whether we decide to pursue the idea further, we are proud of the design we created, and will certainly be taking our kit with us on our next group backpacking trip.
