Timeto
Description
Timeto is a mobile task management and productivity application dedicated to helping non-task-oriented individuals stay on track. Timeto was developed by a team of five creative individuals looking to help procrastinators reach their goal.
Client
Senior Capstone
Year
2023
Type of work
App
Project Summery
Task
Utilize the Goal-Directed Design (GDD) process to design a digital product in the form of an interactive prototype.
Action
Researching productivity and the psychology behind procrastinating habits, conducting user research interviews, creating personas, wireframing, and prototyping to bring Timeto to life.
result
Timeto built as a fully interactive high-fidelity prototype, meeting all the objectives of our course project."
research
Unpacking Procrastination Habits
The Research Phase of the Goal-Directed Design Process involves using observation and interviews to provide qualitative data about potential or actual application users. This phase is especially important because it allows for the discovery of behavioral patterns. The Research Phase is divided into six sub-phases, which include A Kickoff Meeting, Competitive Audit, Literature Review, Stakeholder Interviews, Subject Matter Expert(SME) Interviews, and User Research Interviews. Our team began by aligning on the problem space and identifying early assumptions about user behavior. Through collaborative discussion, we defined a problem statement and brainstormed how our product could support users in their daily lives. From this, we developed a persona hypothesis to guide the rest of our research.
To explore existing solutions, I led a competitive audit of 10 productivity apps and narrowed it down to five that closely aligned with our user goals. This helped us understand common strategies and gaps in the market. Our literature review also deepened our understanding of procrastination and shaped the questions we used in interviews with users, stakeholders, and experts.
To better understand our users, we followed the Goal-Directed Design process and conducted qualitative research, including competitive analysis, literature review, and interviews. We started with a kickoff meeting to define the problem, set assumptions, and build a persona hypothesis. From there, I led a competitive audit of 10 productivity apps and focused on five that aligned best with our users’ needs. The literature review helped us frame interview questions for stakeholders, users, and subject matter experts.
We interviewed Kennesaw State students (sophomores to seniors in Georgia) virtually, exploring their habits, motivation, anxiety, and goals. These conversations revealed how procrastination shows up in daily life and how emotional patterns shape behavior. We also interviewed Dr. Kei Tomita, a behavioral psychology researcher at KSU, who explained that anxiety—often rooted in perfectionism and fear—is a major driver of procrastination. She also debunked the myth that procrastination boosts creativity, emphasizing that early action leads to better outcomes.
Modeling
Modeling into personas
Our research led us to two core personas that reflect distinct procrastination behaviors. Amy Rodriguez, a college junior, is our primary persona. She often feels overwhelmed by anxiety and guilt when procrastinating, driven by perfectionism and emotional stress. She needs a supportive, calming solution to stay on track. Josh Medina, a senior, represents our secondary persona. He approaches tasks logically—breaking them down to minimize effort. Josh values efficiency and quick wins, needing a clear, minimal interface to stay productive. Together, these personas guided our design decisions by highlighting both emotional and strategic user needs.
requirements
Seeing the Problem, Solving the Puzzle
The Requirements Phase focuses on figuring out what the product needs to include for users to reach their goals. We used scenario-based methods to identify key features and interactions. This phase includes five steps: writing problem and vision statements, team brainstorming, understanding user expectations, creating context scenarios, and outlining design requirements. Our problem statement defined the challenge from both user and business perspectives, while the vision statement focused on meeting user needs first. Through context scenarios, we mapped how users might interact with the product based on their motivations and goals. During brainstorming, we explored what the product should ultimately do, look like, and offer to meet those needs effectively.
Framework
Designing the Experience
With all our research and requirements in place, we moved into the Framework Phase—where design begins to take shape. This is where we translated user needs into structure by developing Key Path and Validation Scenarios based on our personas. Key Path Scenarios represent the most common user journeys through the app, while Validation Scenarios explore less frequent paths to ensure a well-rounded, user-centered design. We brought our ideas to life through wireframes and early prototypes of Timeto, mapping out how everything would work together. During this phase, I focused specifically on the statistical features of the app.
