Propose new functionalities for Decidim software
#DecidimRoadmap Designing Decidim together
As of today, most of our clients (@OSP) use Decidim for participatory budgets and we have been collecting users (participants in this case) feedbacks for the last few months.
Most of them point towards the lack of clarity from the workflow. Here are a few examples of the feedback we have had :
- "I wasn't sure my vote was taken into account since I didn't receive any mail confirmation and I didn't make out any visual differences in the design before and after I voted.
- "After I selected the projects I wanted to support, I had not notice that I had to confirm my choices for my vote to be saved" => we observed that 20% to 25% of participants don't go through with the confirmation process for every participatory budget we are involved with.
- "There was a very long list of projects to choose from. The actual design of the projects makes it hard to identify quickly what the project is about and what category it belongs to. Going through all the pages, I was afraid to miss out on a project I really wanted to support".
We propose to address those participants difficulties through a series of enhancements. We already started to work on some of them, others are still works in progress. You can find them here => https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/milestone/23.
We plan to test and iterate on them during the coming weeks before considering any merge.
This proposal has been accepted and is under development
- Has been reviewed by Decidim Product and complies with the Social Contract
- It is funded by Angers
- Developed by Open Source Politics
- Waiting for PR
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
12 comments
Conversation with Antti Hukkanen
This would be a very welcomed changed. We have also conducted a usability testing session where the budgeting feature has raised a lot of issues that I believe these changes address. We are also constantly hearing feedback from the voting feature that it is not clear to the people using it. Most of them have no idea how to vote and they need to go to a physical location to vote in order to get hand-in-hand assistance for the process.
I think the workflow would be much clearer in case the users entered to some kind of "voting pipeline" which would hide all the other features of the site. On the "normal" website, they could browse the budgeting projects but if they want to start voting, there would be a clear BIG and emphasized button at the top of the screen to "CAST YOUR VOTE".
Once they click that button, they would enter to the "pipeline" which would hide all other features of the site. It would just be a listing of the processes and the budgeting progress tab. [...continues...]
[...continued...] In the budgeting "pipeline", it would show the steps of the process, for example:
1. Select the projects
2. Preview your selection
3. Confirm your vote
After they "confirm the vote" (or cancel the process leaving the pipeline), the normal site would come back up with all of its default top navigations and other features. During the "pipeline" all other features but the voting would be hidden.
Users generally get confused when the screen is filled with different buttons and links. Think of going to a physical voting location and having 30 doors to select from where you want to go to with a text on each door that tells what's behind that door. After each door you would have a person explaining you what you can do in that room.
In the normal voting process, you go to the location, show your ID, get a ticket, go to the booth, come out of the booth. There's no way of following a wrong "path" in that process, and if you would - there's always people to guide you forward.
@carol we've seen big improvements on the % of users finishing their voting sequence with these enhancement. Would you consider merging them to master if we made the PR ?
@carol we've had further discussion about this with Helsinki.
Initially this was made into a module for timing reasons. Now we have time to send this to master. Are you guys still ok with us making a PR ?
We include in this feature pack:
- Vote per projects
- Status bar progression while selection projects
- Email confirmation of the vote
- Green layer and updated wording after voting
Hi @virgile_deville, I see that there are 7 PRs and 3 marked as "PR to BCN". Is it just those or is it all of them? https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/milestone/23?closed=1
We should make a quick call to coordinate because we have already made some changes.
Conversation with Pauline Bessoles
Hi @carol, The PRs we want to send to master are the following ones:
- Sticky progress bar for vote per project (https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/issues/543)
- Budget Instructions container with $success color for borders (https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/issues/343)
- Progress Bar color changing according to vote status (https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/issues/513)
- Budget text display of vote progress (https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/issues/455)
We also developed an email for order reminder. It's very useful for users that didn't confirm their vote, and enhance the participation in Decidim participatory budgets :
https://github.com/OpenSourcePolitics/decidim/pull/828
@product are you interested by this feature?
Conversation with Carol Romero
Hey @Pops @virgile_deville some of these features are already in the main repo but not all of them, right?
@pops I suggest we mark this one as it wasn't feature specific and most of it was implemented.
@Pops
I agree, it's confusing, we can make specific proposals to ease the process!
Great, thanks guys!
Add your comment
Sign in with your account or sign up to add your comment.
Loading comments ...