When I started this project, an entire support system was scattered and without a straightforward design. And yet we chose to use the existing platform to collect data from the analytics. For this purpose, we used Google Analytics and the HotGar system

The second source we thought of using is a group of users in which discussions are held about the use of the device. The commenting activity in a group where each user helps the other in solving problems has served us as reliable material in understanding the issues found in real life of our users.

My Conclusions was
(1) Users are interested in understanding how to use the device in their daily life
(2) Users tell about experiences that changed their day-to-day activities with their family.
(3) Users don't know how to find a solution to a problem because they don't know how to define it.
(4) Users return the product because no one will accompany them at the beginning.

Despite all the information we gathered from analytics of the existing system, we understood what the things were being asked about, but something was still missing. We did not know our users' motivations and real pains because they have disabilities. We missed the - understand why?For this purpose, we used the support department's team and discovered a treasure trove of data there.
(1) There are too many CTA's. When it works, you can see in the data that users mainly look for one thing - Tutorials.
(2) Most users come to consume content compared to technical actions (which are usually one-time).
(3) There are several common questions and problems that users come to the site/support center in an attempt to solve.
(4) The percentage of returns is very high and stands at ¼ of the purchases. The main reasons for return are a lack of understanding of how a device might be used by the user daily and a lack of technical knowledge about how to operate the device.
(5) There is no navigation orientation on the site, making it difficult for the service provider to direct the user to the right place.

We started by testing 7 participants with usability testing with the current device. We find some important insights about the device’s usability. We made a formative i order to identify warning lights and convince the stakeholders to perform a broader summative test on children, starting by testing 9 participants with usability testing with the current device. We find some important insights about the device’s usability.

After that, we conducted research with the help of a series of in-depth interviews to understand the needs of the user and the sub-user, who are the parents

After conducting the test, we analysed the data according to the accepted method in UX research.
After understanding where improvements need to be made, we mapped and coded the components to find repetitive behaviours.
Main research insights was
(1) A device with a voice interface works better for the user when it can be controlled with a visual app.
(2) It's better not to force users to go through tutorials during the onboarding stage
(3) Refraining from forcing users to go through tutorials during the onboarding stage is better.
According to this conclusion, we began to build the characterization of our board in this way. In the commission's centre, we placed the daily goal setter as a component that generates the improvement trend.