Evaluation
Task
For
our final task for Design Practice 3, we were given a group client
project. The brief was, to design In teams, implement and evaluate a
website that demonstrates our understanding and expertise in all
three pathway module areas.
We
were assigned team leaders, and from here we chose the client brief
of:
‘PERFECT
PASTRIES
Manufacturing
of sweet and savory pastry products based in Sutton-In-Ashfield,
Nottinghamshire. Trade is conducted through wholesale only. Supplies
to a wide range of other businesses. Colour scheme is prefered to be
taken from his van design. Existing business card. Requires a price
list on website displaying what products are available.’
How we did it
We took a look at the brief and the original website they had which had no content, apart from the logo of the company. As a group, we felt that the logo was outdated and needed improvement, so our first task was to ask our client how they would feel if we had the chance to change their logo. At first this was approved but after we had trouble with the client as they were unspecific on the initial idea, look and requirements of what they wanted, so we started creating a site that we thought would be open to change. After we were told that we would be able to have the chance of rebranding the client’s company, this changed and we then had to negotiate, understand and re work our ideas for creating the website. Because of this we felt it would be appropriate to create two websites, where by one website would fulfil the client’s needs and another that we would produce through a more creative eye.
We took a look at the brief and the original website they had which had no content, apart from the logo of the company. As a group, we felt that the logo was outdated and needed improvement, so our first task was to ask our client how they would feel if we had the chance to change their logo. At first this was approved but after we had trouble with the client as they were unspecific on the initial idea, look and requirements of what they wanted, so we started creating a site that we thought would be open to change. After we were told that we would be able to have the chance of rebranding the client’s company, this changed and we then had to negotiate, understand and re work our ideas for creating the website. Because of this we felt it would be appropriate to create two websites, where by one website would fulfil the client’s needs and another that we would produce through a more creative eye.
After
the whole group was able to have a visual input on the initial
concept of what we wanted and the first website we had original
started, we then split into two teams. One team of Jordan and Emile,
the other team Mehuli and Olivia. Jordan and Emile carried on
designing the site we would have preferred to do, and Mehuli and
Olivia created the second website that we felt would meet the
client’s needs. As required on the brief, it was important to
liaise with the client so that at every step of the way we could make
sure we were always on the right track and constantly getting
feedback. We done this through phone calls and emails. What made it
easier to get feedback, was we felt it would be a good idea from the
start to create a group blog. From here our client would be able to
always have a way of checking our ideas, development and progress.
(http://teamperfectpastries.blogspot.co.uk/)
Were there any
problemsThe only problem we had was the fact that our
client changed their mind on what was open to change. This then
delayed our progress and our initial idea of a schedule where we felt
would have finished the website sooner.
DevelopmentAll
our development can be seen on our group blog.
Strengths and
Weaknesses
Our strengths consisted of the fact
that we worked extremely well as a group. We co-operated well and
constantly made sure every member of the group was always aware of
any changes, ideas or concepts that would any way help or improve our
work load and the project.
We were also all able to efficiently as a group have a chance to code, design and develop. If a member of the group had any problems it was always easy to ask parts of the group as fellow peers for advice and help or even suggestions.
We feel the only weakness we may have had is that as a disadvantage we felt that we didn’t have enough to work. This is because we were delayed in being given appropriate information, and the fact that our client wasn’t secure in what they wanted from the start, which meant that we didn’t have the chance to work as efficiently as we had hoped to. Although throughout we were able to do what we could and take on the work, problems and changes as it came.
We were also all able to efficiently as a group have a chance to code, design and develop. If a member of the group had any problems it was always easy to ask parts of the group as fellow peers for advice and help or even suggestions.
We feel the only weakness we may have had is that as a disadvantage we felt that we didn’t have enough to work. This is because we were delayed in being given appropriate information, and the fact that our client wasn’t secure in what they wanted from the start, which meant that we didn’t have the chance to work as efficiently as we had hoped to. Although throughout we were able to do what we could and take on the work, problems and changes as it came.
Conclusion
Overall we feel everyone
put a substantial amount of work into the project, we feel the way we
approached problems and tasks were well thought out and the structure
of both sites were well thought into and made to a high standard.
