Impacts Table

The impacts table outlines the various impacts associated with a project, initiative, or activity. It provides a structured format for assessing and documenting the potential consequences, both positive and negative, that may arise from the implementation of a project.

We will be focusing on the impacts described in User Experience impacts.

Types of assessment¶

There are two ways that impacts can be assessed:

• Feedback

• Reasoned Speculation

Feedback¶

Some impacts are immediate and you can ask users if they experienced the impact. For example: do you feel the application improved your health and well-being? The feedback can be gather as part of the beta testing.

You can justify this type of impacts assessment by summarising the feedback you obtained from beta testing.

Reasoned Speculation¶

Some impacts are beyond you capacity to assess (eg. reduction in the impacts of climate change). For these types of impacts, you will need to express a justified opinion on its impact

To justify the opinion you need to identify a mechanism to achieve the impact, or provide an example of a similar process. For example, health and well-being was improved through the increase in the users physical activity.

Here is the description and table formatted for the textbook.

Impact evaluation¶

Each impact must be evaluated — not just identified or described. The ISMG awards marks at the critical level only when impacts are:

• connected to a specific feature of your solution

• reasoned — you explain why the feature causes the impact

• supported by evidence or an acknowledgment of why evidence is unavailable

• linked to your success criteria

• considered from the perspective of a named stakeholder

To keep your response concise, record each impact as a single row in the table below. Write one row per impact, at the point in your response where the relevant feature is discussed — not in a separate section at the end.

The PSE column identifies whether the impact is personal, social or economic. The +/− column identifies whether it is a positive or negative impact. You must have a mix of both across your rows. Your stakeholders should reflect the personas or end-user profiles established during planning — do not use generic terms like “the user.”

The Feature causes effect because reasoning column is the core of the evaluation. It must do three things in as few words as possible: name the feature, state what it does to the stakeholder, and explain why that happens.

The Evidence/judgment column closes the evaluation. Cite the outcome of testing or user feedback, then state whether the criterion was met, partially met, or not met. If the impact cannot be measured due to constraints, state that explicitly and briefly explain why.

Example: