Designing a Tool with the End User in Mind

At this stage of the practicum, the key takeaway for me has been the importance of building something useful, not perfect. Our team is designing a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool to help identify where a growing company should—and shouldn’t—deploy its technology. The tool is meant to streamline decision-making, but its real value lies in helping the team quickly spot red flags. That clarity of purpose has shaped how we’ve approached both the structure and content of the tool.

The process so far has reinforced the value of simplicity to me. We’re working with a company that is mission-driven but time-constrained. Our conversations with the CFO and Chief Scientific Officer made it clear that they aren’t looking for theoretical depth—they’re looking for actionable insights, primarily on the negative side of things. The CSO helped us clarify what technical feasibility really means in different contexts. These inputs helped us adjust our criteria to reflect how decisions are actually made within the organization.

It’s also pushed us to shift our own expectations. At the start of the project, there was a temptation to build something expansive—to try to capture every variable and nuance. But as we’ve progressed, we’ve come to realize that usefulness depends on a significantly more focused approach. The most valuable parts of the tool are the ones that filter, not the ones that expand. That’s been a mindset shift for me: impact comes from helping people make faster, clearer decisions—not from covering everything.

A major challenge has been balancing detail with usability. We’re dealing with a lot of variables—economic conditions, side stream availability, policy incentives, infrastructure, and more. But if everything is weighted equally, nothing stands out. We’ve had to make tough calls about what matters most, and how to present that clearly. A good tool doesn’t overwhelm the user—it points them in the right direction.

This project has also highlighted the importance of clarity within the tool’s design. To provide directional guidance under uncertainty. For that reason, we’ve focused on building in flexibility—scenario analysis, adjustable assumptions, and clear outputs that allow the user to test different conditions without losing the structure of the model.

One broader lesson I’m taking from this is how closely analytical work is tied to communication. The logic behind the tool only matters if people understand how to use it. That’s pushed us to think not just about the framework, but about how it’s presented—how insights are visualized, what’s prioritized, and how someone can navigate it with limited time and context.

Finally, working in a cross-functional team has been a valuable part of this experience. Everyone brings a different lens—financial, technical, policy—and integrating those perspectives has made the tool stronger. It’s also forced me to step back and ask: what does the end user actually need?

As we move into the second half of the project, the focus is on refining the tool and making sure it delivers on its purpose: helping the company avoid missteps and allocate resources effectively. If we can do that, this project will have real impact.