Keyboard shortcuts

Press or to navigate between chapters

Press S or / to search in the book

Press ? to show this help

Press Esc to hide this help

Feedback Collection Template

Structured approach to gathering and analyzing feedback from users and stakeholders throughout the design process.

Feedback Collection Strategy

Collection Points:

  • Prototype testing (early design)
  • Mid-development review
  • Beta testing (near completion)
  • Post-launch review
  • Long-term usage feedback

Target Audience:

  • Primary users: _____________________________________________________
  • Secondary users: ___________________________________________________
  • Stakeholders: _______________________________________________________

Prototype Feedback Form

Feedback Session Information

  • Feedback Date: _________________________
  • Tester Name: _________________________
  • Tester Role: _________________________
  • Prototype Version: _________________________
  • Session Duration: _________________________

Section 1: First Impressions (5 minutes)

Initial Reactions:

  1. “What is your first impression of this design?”


  2. “Is it what you expected?”

    • More than expected [ ] As expected [ ] Less than expected
    • Explanation: ________________________________________________
  3. “Would you use this?”

    • Definitely [ ] Maybe [ ] No [ ] Not sure
    • Why? __________________________________________________________

Section 2: Usability (15 minutes)

Using the Product:

  1. “Can you show me how you would use this?”

    • (Observe: difficulties, hesitations, confusion)
    • Notes: _________________________________________________________
  2. “Was it easy to understand how to use?”

    • Very easy [ ] Easy [ ] Neutral [ ] Difficult [ ] Very difficult
    • What was confusing? _______________________________________________
  3. “Are there any parts that don’t work well together?”


Specific Usability Issues:

IssueSeveritySuggestion
High/Med/Low
High/Med/Low

Section 3: Functionality Assessment (10 minutes)

Does it do what it’s supposed to?

Feature/FunctionWorks WellWorks OKDoesn’t WorkNeeded But Missing
-
-
-

Critical Functions:

  • Most important for your use: ________________________________________
  • Missing capability: _________________________________________________

Section 4: Physical Design Assessment (10 minutes)

Appearance & Feel:

Visual Design:

  • Appealing [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unappealing [ ] Doesn’t matter
  • Suggestions: _______________________________________________________

Size & Comfort:

  • Too large / Just right / Too small (circle one)
  • Weight: Too heavy / Just right / Too light (circle one)
  • Comfort feedback: __________________________________________________

Material & Texture:

  • Appropriate: [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Uncertain
  • Feel: _____________________________________________________________
  • Durability concern: _________________________________________________

Color/Finish:

  • Appropriate: [ ] Yes [ ] No
  • Preference: ________________________________________________________

Section 5: Performance & Reliability (10 minutes)

During Testing:

  1. “Did it work consistently?”

    • Always [ ] Usually [ ] Sometimes [ ] Never
    • Issues experienced: ______________________________________________
  2. “How solid/durable does it feel?”

    • Very durable [ ] Durable [ ] Adequate [ ] Fragile [ ] Very fragile
    • Concerns: _______________________________________________________
  3. “Any parts that seem weak?”



Section 6: Overall Satisfaction (5 minutes)

Scoring Matrix:

CriterionRatingComments
Overall satisfaction1 2 3 4 5
Likely to recommend1 2 3 4 5
Meets my needs1 2 3 4 5
Design quality1 2 3 4 5
Value for cost1 2 3 4 5

(1=Poor, 5=Excellent)


Section 7: Suggestions & Improvements (10 minutes)

Open-Ended Feedback:

  1. “What would make this better?”


  2. “What should we change?”


  3. “What should we keep as-is?”


  4. “Would you buy/use this?”

    • Yes [ ] Maybe [ ] No
    • Why? __________________________________________________________

Suggestions Priority:

SuggestionPriorityCategoryEffort
High/Med/LowDesign/Function/MaterialEasy/Med/Hard
High/Med/LowDesign/Function/MaterialEasy/Med/Hard

Section 8: Accessibility Check (5 minutes)

If applicable to your product:

  1. “Can someone with limited vision use this?”

    • Yes [ ] With difficulty [ ] No
    • How: __________________________________________________________
  2. “Can someone with limited mobility use this?”

    • Yes [ ] With difficulty [ ] No
    • How: __________________________________________________________
  3. “Are there any accessibility barriers?”



Post-Testing Notes

Tester Behavior Observations: (What did you notice about how they used it?)


Surprises: (Anything unexpected?)


Key Insights:



Critical Issues Found:



Non-Critical Issues:



Feedback Analysis (After Multiple Sessions)

Common Themes

Frequently Mentioned Issues:

  1. _________________________________________ (Mentioned by ___ of ___% testers)
  2. _________________________________________ (Mentioned by ___ of ___%)
  3. _________________________________________ (Mentioned by ___ of ___%)

Frequently Praised Aspects:



Data Summary

MetricAverageRangeStatus
Overall Satisfaction___/5-//
Likelihood to Recommend___/5-//
Meets Needs___/5-//
Usability Rating___/5-//

Priority Action Items

Must Fix (High Priority - blocks usage):


    • Impact if not fixed: ______________________________________________

    • Impact if not fixed: ______________________________________________

Should Fix (Medium Priority - improves experience):



Nice to Have (Low Priority - enhancements):




Design Changes Resulting from Feedback

Original DesignFeedbackChange MadeRationale

Follow-Up Actions

Immediate Actions:

  • Fix critical issues: _______________________________________________
  • Notify stakeholders: ______________________________________________
  • Update design document: ___________________________________________

Next Test Cycle:

  • Schedule follow-up testing
  • Prepare updated prototype
  • Revise feedback form if needed

Timeline for Changes:

  • Critical fixes by: ___________________________________________________
  • Medium priority by: __________________________________________________
  • Low priority by: ____________________________________________________

Stakeholder Communication

Share findings with:

  • Design team
  • Stakeholders
  • User community
  • Management

Format for sharing:

  • Summary report
  • Presentation
  • Video highlights
  • Detailed documentation

Feedback Tracking

Overall Feedback Summary:

Test RoundDate# TestersKey FindingAction Taken
Prototype V1
Prototype V2
Beta

Sign-Off

Feedback Session Conducted By: ____________________ Analysis Completed By: ____________________ Reviewed By: ____________________

Status:

  • Feedback incorporated into design
  • Partial incorporation (note: __________________________)
  • Under review (decision pending)
  • Declined (reason: _______________________________________)

Session Documentation Date: ____________________ Feedback Database Location: ____________________