This in the development process. In literature,

This chapter explains the implementation of a proof of concept prototype tool based on a number of the artefacts proposed in the previous chapters: constructs, model and methods. Regarding the DSR framework used in this thesis, this corresponds to the intersection between the building activity and the demonstration of the artefact. Furthermore, this chapter also evaluates the prototype tool by applying it to real users (upstream and downstream customers) thus covering the evaluation of the instantiation artefact as well. The development of a prototype tool using these artefacts also contributes to demonstrating their usefulness and thus incorporates part of the evaluation activity of these artefacts.The prototype: A prototype is a working model built to develop and test design ideas (Walker et al., 2002). The ultimate goal of this iteration is to build a prototype to explore requirements and ideas from real life users meanwhile evaluates the proposed artefact.

According to Nissinen, T. (2015) the human-centred design principles are (i)Users are involved throughout design and development (ii)The design is driven and refined by user-centred evaluation (iii) The process is iterative. In this study, users involvement is an essential source of information about the incentive mechanisms and other user requirements. (ISO, 2010.) Stated that Users could participate in the design and evaluate solutions with the help of Prototypes that reflects other design artefacts.  Ullman (2010), has identified four types of prototypes: proof-of-concept, proof-of-product, proof-of-process and proof-of-production. The purpose is to verify and validate assumptions, expectations and calculations made at an earlier stage in the development process.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

 In literature, two type of prototyping is suggested based on purpose and stage of the research namely low-fidelity and high fidelity prototype. Firstly, the low-fidelity prototype It is developed in the early design process, and its implementation involves of a set of static designs that represent diverse scenarios and flows. According to Sefelin et al. (2003) and (Nissinen, 2015), this type of prototype can either be computer-based or paper-based. in short this kind of prototype is suitable to ideas and requirements exploration and design refinement before the real launch of the final product(Mäuselein 2007).

In addition, the low-fidelity type is limited concerning cost and development period (Sharp et al. 2007).Contrastingly, the high fidelity prototype is an only computer-based prototype that has all the functionality of final product where users can not discern between it and final software. This type has high cost and development time compared to low fidelity counterpart. So that, This type is more suitable for selling the idea to customers (Nissinen 2015).

Furthermore; High-Fidelity prototypes lead to shallow feedback, often linked to the appearance and detail rather than basic functionality (Landay and Myers, 2001; Maldague et al., 1998; McCurdy et al., 2006).

 In the current study, the low-fidelity software prototype was developed by the researcher to refine and evaluate the proposed artefact in the previous chapter (second iteration). The justification is stemming from the framework of research design and purpose of prototyping. After brief comparison between the two types in the previous two paragraphs, it is apparent that the low-fidelity prototyping is most suitable for the following reasons (i) the need to elicit detailed incentives and requirements from end-users and advertisers as we still in the design stage, (ii) the cost and time limit imposed by the researcher constraints (iii) Moreover, the ex-ante evaluation is needed at this stage according to DSR evaluation framework, Where it implies that the low to medium cost evaluation is advised within the shortest period (Venable et al., 2012).

To develop our prototype, the researcher capitalised on the artefacts proposed in the previous chapter. The aim is to identify which aspects of the proposed model were not sufficiently reached by existing prototype and focus on the development of some original tools to deal with these aspects. As a result, we focused on the development of a prototype tool that covers the part of our model formed by the actor and issue constructs and the influence relationships between them.