Frami IndoorMap
The original plan was to create an AR and mobile guide pilot for hospitals and primary care services in Finland to help patients move more efficiently within and between healthcare facilities. But during the first part of the project Finland’s provinces were immersed in a national social and health care reform implemented at the regional level, and it was not possible for the interim organisation to give permission to implement the pilot in the district hospital of South Ostrobothnia.
Changing the pilot only affected the location. The technology and type of service remain unchanged. The pilot is now located at the Frami Research and Conference Centre in Seinäjoki, South Ostrobothnia https://www.frami.fi/briefly-in-english/.
The pilot aims to deliver two alternative AR mobile guides, ARway and Tangar Navigator, to the Frami building. The mobile guide will allow customers to navigate within and between the facilities more efficiently. The smart guide will help people moving between different offices and buildings to navigate from the parking lot to the right entrance, find the exact location of the office or the clerk, navigate there and at the same time get easily updated information about Frami’s additional services (meeting rooms, restaurants, art exhibitions, etc.). Chatbots and a 360-degree aerial view were also selected as tools for the pilot.
The pilot is being developed together with stakeholders, such as Into Seinäjoki Oy, the manager of the Fram buildings, and various organisations interested in participating in the pilot and helping their customers with the guide.
The Frami IndoorMap pilot will create a digital service model that can be transferred to different public buildings in the region.
Pilot Development
We selected two alternative indoor map applications from a few options to compare their different features. In both, guidance is triggered by a QR code scanned on a mobile device.
We also wanted a 360-view map to guide visitors to the main doors of the building. This component is scheduled for implementation in early 2023.
An open-source chatbot service was also originally planned, due to the lack of available technical support, the chatbot does not fit into the service model we want to share with e.g. the municipalities in the region.
Please contact us for a "low threshold" if you are planning a digital indoor map application.
Evaluation Results
SUS – System Usability Scale: ARway score = 57
The average value for SUS is 68. Every value under 68 is perceived as a below average score. The value of 57 in this case is interpreted as “low marginal” score, meaning the respondents found the digital tool as not quite ready for mass usage.
Lower scores were given by users who were using Android software and were municipality or other public authority representatives. Most of them had some problems with finding their destination.
Higher scores were given by users who use AR technology “rarely” or “never”.
SUS – System Usability Scale: Tangar score = 73
The average value for SUS is 68. Every value above 68 is perceived as an acceptable score. The value of 73 in this case is interpreted as “good” score, meaning the respondents found the digital tool convenient for use.
Higher scores were given by users who are female and mostly didn’t have problems finding their destination. More than two thirds of them were Apple users.
Higher scores were given by users who use AR technology “rarely” or “never”.
Lower scores were mostly given by users who are municipality or other public authority representatives. Most of them used an Android device.
User Experience Questionnaire - Conclusion - ARway:
The results show that the scales were assessed as neutral. None of the scales is negatively assessed.
In comparison with the benchmark, we can draw the following conclusions:
- The biggest gap in the results between our data and the existing data can be seen in Dependability and Effiecency, meaning that the tool can be significantly improved in order to provide a better feeling of control and to become easier for solving different tasks.
- Attractiveness (overall impression of the product) and Perspicuity (the level of getting familiar of the product and its usage) can be significantly improved as well, since they are both bad compared to the benchmark.
- In terms of Stimulation and Novelty the collected data for this app is below the average, meaning that the excitement and creativity of the product needs to be improved as well
User Experience Questionnaire - Conclusion - Tangar:
In comparison with the benchmark, we can draw the following conclusions:
- The biggest gap in the results between our data and the existing data can be seen in Stimulation, meaning that the tool can be significantly improved in order to provide more motivation and excitement for using the app.
- Every other scale can be improved as well since the data for this tool is below the benchmark average.
Comparison between ARway and Tangar
Tangar performed better than ARway if we compare their SUS and UEQ. Tangar had a SUS score of 73 which is above average, while ARway had a SUS score of 57 which is below average. If we compare them with UEQ results, Tangar had positive and neutral evaluations, while ARway only had neutral evaluations. It must be noted that the technologies evaluated are very novel, and our results are limited. ARway has provided significant updates to its tool since the evaluation, and both tools were evaluated at the beta stage of their development.
South Ostrobothnia Team
Individuals involved in the pilot: Lea Palomäki, Oskar Śniegowski and Pia Kattelus
