How can you calculate the severity rating of usability issues in testing?

To assign severity ratings to issues for a flow in consideration, the following steps are key: 1. Identify issues through a usability test with the relevant user count. Example issues: screen 2 drop-off due to confusion in xyz (strengthened with heat maps or eye tracking), users attempting to click on a non-clickable element, etc. 2. Tag and measure frequency of these issues using tools like Google Analytics or insights. 3. Define a scale post-measurement to collectively categorize issues into two, three, or more buckets, considering multiple factors.

A simple way is to evaluate each issue on a valid rating scale (generally its on a scale of 1 to 5) and classify the issue to a score based on the nature of the issue. For example, if the issue: - Makes the system unusable - 1 (Critical) - Significantly impacts usability - 2 (major) - Impacts usability but there is a way to bypass this to achieve the intended goal - 3 (moderate) - Minor impact on usability - 4 (minor) - Impact the aesthetics only - 5 (cosmetic) Nevertheless, all the usability issues are important to resolve to ensure better UX, however, this severity rating only helps in prioritizing the issues for fixing them, where critical and major issues typically take priority over moderate, minor, or cosmetic issues.

I generally use an easy scale that generally is difficult to be quantified. There are more quantifiable scales but I find most of them to be not suitable for presenting it to business teams. For example, I use: Critical issues: These include any usability issues that can cause the breakdown of tasks - lead to task not being complete. Red flags: These are issues that present unnecessary workarounds, steps and delays in the performance of a task. But even in the presence of these issues, users can still perform the tasks. Cosmetic issues: These are cosmetic issues that are more visual inconsistencies, bg VS foreground issues, contrast issues, font and colour issues that limit the user while performing the task.

A severity rating scale categorizes issues by their impact: Critical (High): Software is unusable or experiences severe issues. Major (Medium): Major functionalities are affected but not unusable. Minor (Low): Minimal impact on functionality or user experience. This scale aids in prioritizing bug fixes and communicating issue importance.

In my experience, I have found different levels of usability issues. To calculate the severity rating, we should know how frequent the issue is occurring and how severe it is. Frequency can be calculated as Number of times issue occurring/Number of times tried to reproduce the issue. How severe the issue is that can be decided based on giving a scale for low (1), medium (2), high (3), showstopper (4). If the issue severity is negligible, that would be given severity as low. If it needs to be fixed, but may be at a later point of time, then medium. If it impacts and important to fix, then high. If use cannot proceed with issue, then showstopper. Severity rating=Frequency*severity.

Calculating the severity rating involves assessing how much an issue impacts users. I consider factors like impact, frequency, user feedback, and workarounds. If an issue has a significant negative effect and occurs frequently, it gets a higher severity rating. This helps prioritize fixing crucial problems first, ensuring a smoother and more user-friendly experience. By focusing on high-severity issues, we enhance the UX/UI, making our product more enjoyable and efficient for users.

Impact: Assess how severely the issue affects the software. Functionality: Consider the criticality of impacted functionalities. User Experience: Gauge the impact on overall user satisfaction. Priority: Evaluate urgency based on project and business needs. Consistency: Check if the issue occurs consistently across platforms. Accessibility: Consider impact on users with different abilities. Potential Workarounds: Assess if users can find alternative solutions. Frequency: Determine how often users are likely to encounter the issue. Critical Paths: Evaluate if the issue disrupts critical user workflows. Business Impact: Assess potential consequences on customers or revenue. Combine these factors to derive a severity rating for the issue.

Severity rating is a crucial metric in issue management, reflecting the potential impact and urgency of a problem. Beyond numeric scoring, consider the broader context. A high score might indicate a critical issue, but understanding its context, such as user impact or business consequences, is vital. Collaborative discussions and input from diverse stakeholders enrich severity assessment, ensuring a holistic perspective. Additionally, adapt scoring criteria based on project specifics, aligning severity with organizational goals. Prioritize communication, as a transparent severity rating process fosters a proactive approach to issue resolution.

The calculation of severity rating may be unfamiliar, but in practice, those with extensive product knowledge, such as a product lead or manager, often adjust the severity of an issue based on factors like frequency, impact, and persistence. Testers play a crucial role by ensuring bug descriptions contain all necessary information, aiding in the accurate assessment and prioritization of issues.

Una escala simplificada y de fácil identificación para su aplicación puede ser: 4: El problema impide totalmente que los usuarios completen una tarea o flujo en el producto. 3: El problema dificulta significativamente la finalización del flujo o tarea, requiriendo acciones adicionales por parte del usuario. 2: El problema causa cierta interrupción en el flujo o tarea, pero los usuarios aún pueden completarla con esfuerzo adicional. 1: El problema es molesto, pero no impide directamente la finalización del flujo de trabajo. En esta escala, la prioridad para su resolución debe seguir el orden de mayor a menor.

Prioritization: Use severity rating to prioritize fixing critical usability issues. Focus Resources: Allocate resources to address high-severity issues first. Communication: Clearly communicate severity levels to development teams. Testing Emphasis: Prioritize testing efforts on high-severity aspects. User Impact: Understand the potential impact on user satisfaction. Continuous Improvement: Utilize severity ratings for ongoing usability improvement. Feedback Loop: Establish a feedback loop with users to validate severity assessments. Development Guidance: Guide developers on fixing critical issues promptly. Release Decisions: Influence release decisions based on severity ratings. Metrics Tracking: Track severity

The severity rating in usability testing serves as a crucial tool for efficient analysis and improvement. In reporting, a structured presentation of issues with severity ratings highlights critical aspects, enabling teams to focus on high-impact problems. Metrics like average severity offer a quantitative overview, aiding in gauging overall usability. Prioritization becomes strategic by addressing severe issues first, considering the balance of effort and impact. The severity rating acts as a compass for resource allocation, guiding decisions on which issues warrant immediate attention. Comparatively, it serves as a benchmark, allowing teams to track usability evolution and make informed decisions based on historical severity trends.

Benefits: Prioritization: Efficiently prioritize issue resolution. Communication: Standardized communication of issue severity. Resource Allocation: Optimize resource allocation. Focus: Concentrate efforts on critical testing areas. User Impact: Highlight potential impact on user experience. Limitations: Subjectivity: Severity perception varies. Context Dependency: Severity depends on usage context. Overemphasis: Risk of neglecting other crucial factors. Limited Detail: May not capture all issue nuances. Dynamic Nature: Severity can change with product evolution.

Benefits: A severity rating scale provides a structured framework for evaluating usability issues. It streamlines communication by offering a standardized language for discussing problems. The scale's quantitative nature facilitates tracking improvements over time and across scenarios, aiding in evidence-based decision-making. Limitations: Despite its advantages, a severity rating scale demands a well-defined criteria set, and its effectiveness relies heavily on context and perspective. Additionally, the scale's inherent simplicity might not adequately capture the nuanced and diverse nature of usability issues, occasionally leading to the oversimplification of complex problems.

This is something each product should follow, this helps to identify early issues before real users experience the product. So this is a important process to be followed as it is direct impact on the success of the product. There is limitation as well, cause we are doing this testing in controlled environment. Which leads to bias results, sometimes we didn't get the results required. And it requires resources and time, which makes most of ignore it, due to tight this limitation. But now we have many online platforms where we can hire users for this usability testing which give unbiased results. So I believe, if we have budget and time, and really serious about the product UX, we must go for it.

Any tool that promotes team efficiency in identifying findings and implementing improvements in the experience, in terms of time and costs, will be beneficial as long as its evaluation criteria adapt to the ever-changing sociocultural, behavioral and digital literacy context. of the users who will participate in the test.

In moderated usability testing, with small n, severity evaluation on a scale helps standardize an approach to prioritization but there are likely reliability issues. -- Factors to consider Impact on task success – will this issue block task completion? Task criticality – if the task is central to the feature, if it’s used frequently, it must impact prioritization Frequency of users who have the same problem – even in small n, if multiple people have the same issues, it’s a signal that the issue should be prioritized high User frustration (mostly found by participant quotes, and even 1 user saying, “this is hard to figure out” needs to be taken seriously Impact on business goals

Reliability: Consistent Criteria: Clearly define and communicate severity criteria. Calibration: Ensure consistent understanding and application across teams. Training: Provide training to users and testers on severity assessment. Validity: User Involvement: Include users in severity assessment for real-world impact. Expert Input: Seek input from usability and domain experts. Iterative Refinement: Continuously refine severity criteria based on feedback. Pilot Testing: Pilot test the severity scale to identify and address issues.

One common approach is to use a rating scale that assigns severity levels such as low, medium, and high to different usability issues based on their impact on user experience.

To enhance the reliability and validity of a severity rating scale, thorough pre-testing planning is essential. Clearly define and document criteria and scoring guidelines, ensuring a standardized approach. Train evaluators rigorously, fostering a shared understanding of the scale's application. Incorporate diverse evaluators and user perspectives to minimize bias and enhance reliability. Employ multi-method validation, including user feedback and performance metrics, to triangulate severity assessments. Regularly review and update criteria to align with evolving testing goals. Consistent training, diverse input, and ongoing refinement contribute to a robust severity rating scale.

How often does a user stumble (frequent vs. rare)? How badly does it trip them up (critical roadblock vs. minor hiccup)? Combining these whispers and shouts reveals the true rating. Remember, context is key – consider user goals and product flow when assigning the final verdict. Listen closely, and those pesky usability gremlins will reveal their true severity!

The severity rating is somewhat subjective and different teams may have slightly different criteria. The key is consistency within the testing process and communication about the chosen severity levels.

Nem sempre conseguimos fazer testes de usabilidade com uma grande quantidade de pessoas, o que pode dificultar a mensura??o dos problemas. Mas é importante considerar sua amostra como 100% e observar quanto um problema se repete durante os testes de usabilidade e como isso se reflete no todo. Outra forma de medir a efetividade da experiência é aplicando o SUS (System Usability Scale) com seus usuários, isso ajudará a entender os pontos de melhoria e se o fluxo precisa evoluir como um todo.

Identify what type of testing the scale is applicable to, since it will depend on how extensive the flow we are going to test is and what we are going to test. For short tests with a single action, for example, it will only make the debrief and conclusions more complex.