Self check-in kiosk for coworking centre
INTERACTION DESIGN
This project focuses on the design and implementation of a system for automated nighttime access and onboarding of new users at a coworking center. The inspiration comes from the issue that people without membership are unable to use the coworking center during night hours, randomly when needed outside of opening hours, or for other urgent work requirements.
Year:
10/2024 - 01/2025
Location:
Prague, Czech Republic
Client:
B Work, Masaryk University
Design framework:
Design Thinking, Human-Centered Security
Tools:
Teams, Figma, Google Sheets
3D Hover Component
Connect a frame to the component.
Research
Define
Ideate
Outcome
The problem:
Coworking centres operate strictly during business hours. Anyone arriving at night, in transit, or with urgent work has no way to register, pay, and access the space without staff being physically present. Members and prospective users get turned away during the exact moments they need the space most, and the centres lose revenue from non-business-hour demand they can't capture.
Goal:
Design and prototype a self-service kiosk that lets new users register, pay, and access a coworking centre 24/7 without staff assistance, increasing the centre's usability and revenue while removing the barrier of business-hour-only onboarding.
My role:
UX/UI Designer running the end-to-end design challenge. Stakeholder research at B Work Bali, user surveys and interviews, persona work, problem framing, How Might We workshops, low and high-fidelity prototyping, two rounds of moderated user testing, heuristic review, and final handoff documentation to the coworking centre management.
Methods:
Service Safari
Stakeholder questionnaire
User surveys and interviews
Empathy map
Qualitative personas
UX project brief
Competitor analysis
Problem statement
How Might We workshop
Affinity mapping and dot voting
Storyboarding
Low and high-fidelity prototyping
Moderated user testing
Heuristic review
Discovery
I started in the field, not in slides. Before designing any system for kiosk-based check-in, I needed to understand how coworking centres handle access today, who their users are, and where the experience breaks for people arriving outside business hours. I spent time as a user, talked to staff, and mapped real flows from inside the building.
/01
Service Safari
For some reason, the website offers two registration options. The first is a sign-up section that leads to a broken page with small print indicating that there is a waiting list for membership. The second path is through membership, where a potential member can even register, and after selecting a membership, they will receive an email with the terms of service. Both paths are peculiar and inadequately address the situation.
I mapped these paths by taking screenshots of each page and creating a specific flow to have a clear overview of how it works in reality.
To avoid biases, however, I wanted to understand why this was happening. So, I went to the B Work in the later hours and looked for someone who could explain what was behind this.
/02
Observation
Through communication with the staff on WhatsApp, I obtained the contact of the coworking center's general manager, who, unfortunately, was not present during my research.
I decided to send him a questionnaire that included about ten open-ended questions. My main goal, however, was to answer two key questions:
Why do the websites support registration but not payment, while physical registration still works?
Why is it not possible to obtain membership and to confirm not only hypotheses but also the reasons why the website does not function as an onboarding tool, and whether there is any interest from the coworking center in having the option for automatic nighttime registration.
The current website doesn't work so that you can register and pay and use the membership straight away. This is now because our coworking center is overcrowded and we are trying to filter out other members, however we still allow people to register physically."
B Work Management
The main insights:
Registrations operate physically during working hours due to a reduction in applicants and capacity reasons.
They would appreciate any system or suggestion that would help us to register people outside of business hours.
/03
User surveys and interviews
Now it was necessary to obtain information and confirm or refute the hypotheses from the users of the coworking centre themselves, but also from potential interested parties.
First, I created a questionnaire that contained open and closed questions about whether there is really an interest in night registration or if they have experience with self checking registration or how would like to see this registration.
A total of 12 responses were collected and analysed to identify recurring patterns and themes. However, I was interested to see how respondents would react if I asked them in person. So I took the questionnaire and asked random users in the coworking center. In the end, I got 6 more respondents. In the end, the answers did not differ and my hypotheses were confirmed.
/04
Empathy map
An empathy map helped me organize the insights from surveys and interviews to better understand the needs, concerns, and motivations of users when registering and accessing coworking spaces outside regular opening hours.
/05
Qualitative personas
Based on qualitative research, including interviews and surveys, I created three personas to represent key user groups. These personas highlight users' motivations, frustrations, and behaviors regarding nighttime coworking access. They are rooted in real data to inform user-centered design decisions and address recurring themes effectively.
Define
After collecting evidence in the field, I distilled the work into a clear brief and a problem statement. This phase translated scattered findings into a structured project foundation: vision, value proposition, scope, and risks. From there I formulated the design challenge the team could act on.
/01
UX project brief
Following the recommendation of my interaction design teacher, Matěj Kaninský, from Masaryk University in Brno, I applied a so-called UX Project Brief for this project.
Having gathered sufficient data and confirmed my hypotheses about the existing problem, I compiled this brief in accordance with his advice. The brief covered motivation, business proposition and competition, key results, target audience, data and research, scope, risks, way of working, tools, and budget.
Vision: Provide coworking centers with 24/7 access and a simple registration and onboarding process.
Value proposition: Automation of registration access. Secure, easy and immediate use of coworking spaces without membership.
Success metrics: Number of registrations and accesses outside opening hours. Frequency of reuse. Increased accessibility of the coworking centre. Reduction of operating costs.
/02
Competitor analysis
For inspiration and a better understanding of how other coworking centers operate and whether they have their own check-in system, I found that none of the large coworking centers use such a system. I focused mainly on coworking centers in Bali, Australia, and the Czech Republic.
The common feature among these coworking centers is an initial meeting where a coworking member presents the membership and then explains the rules of the coworking space. A particular case is a coworking center in Prague, which, while not offering automatic check-in within the coworking space itself, does provide a kiosk at the reception of the hotel. When checked in, this kiosk generates a key card for the hotel room.
The coworking centers of direct competitors both in Bali, Australia, and the Czech Republic do not provide immediate registration outside of working hours.
There are exceptions that provide onboarding during night hours. These are either pre-informed employees or, in one case, a kiosk that issues a card functioning as both a hotel room key and an access card to the coworking space.
/03
Problem statement
Based on the responses from the stakeholder questionnaire as well as questionnaires and interviews with coworking center members, I confirmed my hypothesis and potential problem.
In order to define the design challenge. It was necessary to write a problem statement. I used Martin Kaninský's recommendations as well as the NNgroup Norman website to provide a theoretical basis for what the problem statement should look like and contain.
"Onboarding B Work coworking centre was designed to provide a flexible working environment for its members during normal working hours. I observed that the center did not allow ad hoc access for new users outside of business hours, resulting in lost leads, unused space during non-emergency hours, and limited access for professionals with urgent needs.
How could we create a solution for the target audience that would allow easy registration and access to the coworking center outside of normal business hours while increasing its usability and revenue generated?"
Ideate
With the design challenge framed, I moved into generating solutions. I ran a How Might We workshop with members and experimented with AI-generated ideas. Then I narrowed down the field through dot voting, affinity mapping, and a return to flow.
/01
How Might We
After defining the problem statement, we were able to use this statement for the "How Might We" workshop.
The "How Might We" workshop was conducted online and was attended by current coworking center members, one former member and one participant who had never been to the B Work Bali coworking center. As part of our challenge, we also experimented with generating ideas using artificial intelligence.
/02
Affinity mapping
and dot voting
After the "How Might We" workshop, we continued categorizing using Affinity Mapping. We selected the ideas that received the most votes using the Dot Voting method and then categorized these ideas using Affinity Mapping.
The session ended with a discussion about what was essential for our particular project and whether the ideas were feasible within the design brief.
For our design challenge, we chose the segment that matched the design challenge the most which was the complete automation of onboarding into a coworking center.
Ideal form of access: We agreed on a kiosk that could be located at an airport or in McDonald's as one of the options for automatic registration and entry into the coworking center.
No just a tablet: The tablet was ultimately rejected as an option because it would need to be connected to a payment terminal, which would complicate its use.
Cash payment option: We considered whether to include a cash payment option. I incorporated this option into the initial design to determine if it would be desired by respondents.
Key generation and kiosk functionality: The coworking center utilizes up to three apps for key generation, prompting us to evaluate the kiosk's door access management. The kiosk can process payments and generate an entry code, a more effective solution is to store the access key as a QR code in an app, generated post-payment and during initial onboarding.
/03
Back to the flow
To revise the ideas from our coworking center and to understand the flow again, I went back to the original flow and simulated our basic use case. Based on our workshop and the current situation our coworking center faces, our solution could reduce up to two redundant flows.
Check-in and introduction to the coworking center would occur at the kiosk, with a solution being payment via a terminal at the kiosk followed by a visual presentation of the coworking center.
The use of the app as a key would be retained and used for both the main coworking center spaces and the yoga.
Deliver
With the concept set, I moved into making it real. Visual thinking, mapping, prototyping and testing helped translate the workshop conclusions into screens, flows, and a tested kiosk experience. Each iteration was tested with users and adjusted before the next.
/01
Visual thinking
My original plan was to continue generating visual ideas like Crazy 8's after the "How Might We" workshop, however the original meeting got extended and it was no longer possible to meet later so I used the Storyboard method which helped me to present the steps based on all the ideas and information from the previous methods which I could then apply to the wireframe model.
/02
Mapping
Based on previous methods, I was able to take the proposed flow and simulate how each step would look using a low-fidelity model in FigJam. This allowed me to define the basic number of screens, including other dependencies.
/03
Back to the competitors
To understand the general structure of the kiosk and self-checkout, and to get more inspiration, I decided to go back to the competitors.
The kiosks that most caught my attention fell mainly into three categories. Standard ones in fast food chains like McDonald's, but also airport kiosks from Jetstar and AirAsia, which are connected to apps for later verification of boarding passes and management of flight and account information.
Kiosks for payment and possible check-in are not only at airports. I also remembered that they are an indispensable part of banks, both as queueing systems and as ATMs that can serve as kiosks for withdrawing and depositing money. Many kiosks are also enhanced with voice and video, making them much more accessible for people with special needs.
The competitors I studied are indirect, primarily because I couldn't find self-service kiosks that address this within the onboarding process for coworking centers.
Top insights:
The start always begins with an introductory page that encourages interaction. It can be complemented by an advertising section, a color visualization in the brand's colors, but it may also include promotional banners and other links, such as cashback, discount offers, general information about the services offered, and so on.
Kiosks typically use a combination of different interaction methods with the user. The basic forms are interactive patterns, whether on a touchscreen or through buttons placed below the monitor. The process can be supplemented from the very beginning with audio prompts or confirmations, either by voice or sound signals.
The conclusion of the process on the kiosks I studied offers the option to print a document containing the final data. Or the option to share digitally, such as via email.
/04
Paper research
I was curious whether there has already been research on the topic of coworking and self-checkout terminals. I used the Scite.ai assistant and had it generate information and research on this topic.
The implementation of self-service kiosks in coworking centers can significantly enhance user experience and operational efficiency. Kiosks speed up the check-in process and management of reservations, increasing user satisfaction and making space usage more
efficient.
Although kiosks provide users with greater autonomy and control, it is important to maintain a balance between technology and personal interaction, especially in environments where community and networking are important. Additionally, investing in user-friendly kiosk designs is key to ensuring their effectiveness and acceptance by users.
/05
First prototype
and user testing
For the first prototype, I used Figma. I implemented the flow I had designed as a potential solution and used real content so that the user could work with actual data.
A total of 6 respondents participated in the first user research. My goal was to find out how users would react to the process and steps if they wanted to obtain membership at a coworking center outside of working hours and there was a kiosk available to assist them.
Overall, 10 issues were found, of which 1 was critical, 7 were rated as medium errors, and 2 errors were of very low priority.
Top 6 findings:
It is not stated how much I will pay in taxes; the total amount is not specified.
The form is too long and there are unnecessary requirements, such as how I heard about them and the like.
Payment should be online only; having cash doesn't make sense.
The 3D navigation map and staff explanation can be reduced. The user can forget the map including the staff who may not be there.
The offer should be time-adaptive. I'm not sure if selecting a weekend pass will grant me access to the system.
The text at the end explaining what is happening does not make sense.
/06
Testing updates and second prototype
Based on the feedback from the first test, I addressed all the identified issues and requirements. The research was conducted on an updated prototype, and I tested it online on Teams with five respondents. This time, five issues were found, of which one was categorized as medium and the remaining four as operational requirements.
Last feedback:
Could be there sos contacts or AI assistant if something happens or doesn't work.
Language options missing would be great.
Video with intro can be mandatory if is there terms and rules.
Can't cancel whole process.
Would be great to see steps of the process.
/07
Final prototype and heuristic review
The final prototype incorporates all the processed requirements and fixed issues. However, it was crucial to determine the research had uncovered all the shortcomings and whether it aligns with the fundamental heuristic principles. To do this, I used heuristic analysis based on Nielsen's rules and procedures published on the NN Group website.
At the very beginning of the analysis, I utilized various steps and recommended procedures from the theoretical foundation. Two deficiencies were identified, of which two were addressed. At point nine, an error state was added to the prototype for cases of unfilled fields, including system errors 500, and furthermore, the documentation of functionality was compiled.
Heuristic checklist:
✅ Visibility of System Status
✅ Match Between the System and the Real World
✅ User Control and Freedom
✅ Consistency and Standards
✅ Error Prevention
✅ Recognition Rather than Recall
❌ Flexibility and Efficiency of Use
✅ Aesthetic and Minimalist Design
❌ Help Users Recognize, Diagnose, and Recover from Errors
❌ Help and Documentation
Outcome
The work was handed off to the management of the coworking centre with three deliverables, then evaluated retrospectively. This section captures what shipped, what I learned, and where the project genuinely fell short, including a self-service barrier I could not solve within the brief.
/01
Final delivery
Time flies. I had to move again, this time from Bali to Australia, so my membership at one of the best coworking centers in Bali had to end. I completed the design challenge I accepted, up to the final prototype and documentation phase. I handed this over to the manager of the coworking center with thanks for the opportunity to undertake this design challenge and apply it specifically at B Work Bali.
What has been delivered:
Documentation.
Visual designs and patterns.
Data sheets.
/02
Retrospective
The design challenge in the subject of interaction design was a very entertaining discipline for me, where I tried redesigning the process in a hybrid form, for which I am very grateful. However, as a designer, I also look back at the steps and decisions I made, and with each challenge, I not only learn something new but also retrospectively evaluate my possible bad decisions or mistakes.
The final product, a kiosk simplifying onboarding outside of working hours, meets the challenge requirements and, according to research, offers a simple and comfortable alternative that users prefer over personal meetings and scheduling appointments.
/03
What I learned
However, the process did not consider users with special needs, which I see as a personal failure. I added this question to the stakeholder questionnaire: "How is the coworking center equipped for users with special needs?" The answer I received indicated that another coworking center is planned in a different part. From this response, it's clear that management does not want to create a bad impression, especially with someone conducting this challenge as part of university studies, and whose work will likely serve the public in a student portfolio. Had this interview been conducted in person, I could have inquired more about these needs and the reasons why the coworking center is not accommodating people with special needs.
I believe some errors are overlooked by management precisely because the coworking center, despite technical shortcomings on websites and in onboarding, still functions well and has no problem with the existing community.
Looking at the results of our workshop, I also perceive some influence throughout the workshop when one participant mentioned the kiosk, which triggered a widespread discussion. However, the financial investment required by the development department and whether it would be more practical to have only a mobile application were not considered. As a facilitator, I did not intervene because it seemed like a good idea. In practice, however, this implementation might not have been possible, thus reflecting back on the stakeholder interview, which was insufficient for this challenge because the design challenge could have been framed differently, thus specifying more details and needs of the business itself.
/04
Next steps and reflection
The question remains whether the application and key could be replaced by a standalone application that would be local and would not require paying for licenses for additional applications or functionalities.
Furthermore, the Crazy 8's method, which could have better anchored ideas that were more or less consistent in the process, was not applied. In the storyboard, I attempted to address this situation, but I believe that as an individual who represents the persona of a coworking center, I can balance the ideas of four other respondents, which may be skewed.
In conclusion, as evident from the competitors' analysis, no coworking centers have a self-service terminal available because management prefers to introduce new users in person, which has a much friendlier format. From experience, I must admit that socialization within coworking is not 100% successful, and it always depends on individuals whether they want to get to know each other or not. The fact is that the coworking center is exclusively a place for work matters, which differ among individuals and positions and are conditioned by time zones. However, coworking centers try to overcome this social barrier through thematic training and briefings.
Personally, however, I do not think this would significantly affect onboarding an employee, whether through a kiosk or a mobile application. In challenges like this, I would have preferred more personal interaction and especially not to be dismissed with the excuse that a stakeholder is not available, which in our case was the main manager of the coworking center, and to start the design challenge without further interviews. Nevertheless, I thank you for this challenge.been framed differently, thus specifying more details and needs of the business itself.
