Before I really dive into my master thesis research, I wanted to meet my supervisor FH‑Prof. Baumann one more time. This was a two‑hour talk where we went through everything: my plan, possible contacts, how to start and also some real‑life stories. It felt like a good send‑off before I move back to Vienna and start the fieldwork.
We first talked about contacts and experts. I told him about the UX Graz Speed Dating the evening before. I spoke with an employee from AVL, the company that builds parts for Audi and has specialists in e‑mobility. Since my girlfriend’s father has an Audi e‑tron, we decided to focus my thesis on Audi. It makes sense – I can test real Audi systems and interfaces. Baumann liked that and said it gives my work a clear focus.
Then he shared a personal story that stuck with me. His neighbours bought an electric car, but they live in an apartment without their own wallbox or garage. So he offered them the extra parking spot at his house. They run a long extension cable from their apartment, through his garden, to the car. He showed me a photo – it looks like a DIY solution, but it works for now. This story shows the infrastructure gap: people want EVs, but the system is not ready yet. You still have to get creative or struggle.
We also discussed different charging types, which I want to explain early in my thesis. There are private options like normal sockets (slow, 2.3 kW) or wallboxes (up to 22 kW AC). Then public chargers: slow AC (Type 2, up to 22 kW), fast DC (CCS2 up to 350 kW), and some older ones like CHAdeMO. Audi uses CCS2, which is standard in Europe for fast charging. Cables look different – home ones are thinner, fast chargers thicker and heavier. I will make a simple table for this.https://ev-orientrise.com/blogs/blog-1/complete-adapter-guide-for-european-ev-owners-from-ccs-to-chademo https://evniculus.eu/de-fr/pages/ev-charging-adapters-1
Looking to the future, we talked about Plug & Charge, where you just plug in and the car app handles payment automatically. EU rules (AFIR) will make this standard soon – all new public chargers must support ISO 15118 by 2025, and Plug & Charge by 2027. We also mentioned inductive charging (wireless on the street), but that is still speculative. These visions show where onboarding could go: seamless, no cards, no apps needed.https://alternative-fuels-observatory.ec.europa.eu/general-information/news/european-commission-publishes-delegated-acts-afir-open-consultation
The big discussion was about the whole system. Charging is not just one thing. It depends on technology (connectors, power), legal rules (contracts, roaming), UX and service design (apps, instructions, psychology of trust), money (prices, tariffs), and infrastructure (parking, cables). We drew a quick diagram: all parts connect, and if one fails, the whole experience breaks. This system thinking fits perfectly with my service blueprint plan.
This talk was important because it gave me confidence. We prepared interview questions and who to contact next (AVL, Audi experts). Baumann’s neighbour story reminded me: my research is not abstract – it solves real problems people have today. Now I feel ready to start: first the literature and system analysis, then interviews with first‑time users. The Audi focus makes it concrete. I am excited to see what happens when I test these touchpoints myself.
Disclaimer: This post was written with help from AI for structure and grammar, but all content, stories and reflections are from my own experience and conversation with my supervisor.
For this impulse I decided to just sit, watch and listen. No laptop, no papers. Only me, two public charging stations and forty minutes each.
Location 1: Mürzzuschlag MER Charger
The first location was a busy highway charger near Mürzzuschlag, next to a McDonald’s. The provider was MER AT and there were three stations with six plugs in total. When I arrived, it was already quite full. I plugged in my car and then tried to look casual while secretly observing everyone else.
Very quickly I saw one big pattern: people arrived, slowed down, looked around… and then left again, because everything was taken. I saw this several times. At least three cars did a small sad circle and drove away. In that moment I thought: “So many apps show the charger on the map, but not clearly if it is actually free when you arrive.” For a first‑time user this must feel terrible.
While I was staring at all this, I started thinking about reservations. Would it help if you could reserve a charger for, say, 3 p.m.? But then I imagined another car arriving at 2:30 p.m., starting to charge, and then getting cut off at 3 p.m. by a cold software rule. That also sounds like a recipe for anger. So in my notebook I wrote: “Reservation might solve one problem, but create new ones.”
Another thing I noticed: people carry many different charging cards. Some drivers opened their wallets like playing cards and tried one after another on the reader. It looked like a strange card game: “Does this one work? No.Next card. Maybe this one.” It is almost funny, until you remember they are standing in the cold with a low battery.
The classic behaviour at this highway spot was also very clear. Most people plugged in, checked the screen nervously for a few seconds, then walked straight into McDonald’s. I assume many of them used the time to eat. One or two people just went to the toilet and then waited in their car until the charge was finished.
Two scenes really caught my attention. Twice I saw someone drive to a free station, get out, try to plug in, and then something clearly went wrong. One man tapped around on the screen, looked confused, and then even hit the interface lightly with his hand. After that he simply unplugged and drove away. I would have loved to ask him, “What exactly happened?” but he was gone faster than I could move.
Location 2: Vienna Charger at HOFER
The second observation place was very different. It was a charger on a Hofer parking lot in Vienna. Much less traffic, much less drama. People drove in, connected the cable, checked quickly if it started, and then walked into the Hofer. When they came back with their groceries, they unplugged and left. Everything looked calm and routine.
My feeling is that many of these users already know this charger well. Maybe they shop there every week and charge at the same time. So the station is part of their normal habit, not a big unknown adventure. That might be one reason why there were fewer visible problems.
Comparing both locations was very interesting. The highway charger showed all the typical pain points: queues, no real‑time visibility, card chaos, technical errors and stressed people. The supermarket charger felt more like a quiet background service that just works for the locals. For my master thesis this contrast is important. The same technology can create very different experiences depending on context, frequency of use and user familiarity.
The next logical step for me would be to talk to these people, not only watch them. Interviews could help me understand what they really feel in these moments: stress, boredom, routine, anger, or maybe even satisfaction. But already now, just standing there for forty minutes at each place gave me a rich view into the real life of public EV charging – far away from clean diagrams and perfect user journeys.
Disclaimer: This post was written with help from AI for structure and grammar, but all content, stories and reflections are from my own experience.
For this impulse I finally left my laptop and went outside. I borrowed a friend’s Audi Q4 e‑tron for two weeks and tried to live like a “real” EV driver. I drove between Graz and Vienna, searched for chargers on the road and in the city, and tried to feel what first‑time users feel. It was exciting, but also often very frustrating.
The first big problem was something very simple: cable length and parking. Two times I could not charge because the cable was way too short. The cars next to me were parked very close and very wide, so I could not place the Audi in a position where the plug reached the port. I stood there with the fast‑charging cable in my hand and could only laugh and be angry at the same time. It felt so stupid: the charger was free, my battery was low, but the physical layout made it impossible to start the session.
The second repeating problem was payment. My main charging card was sometimes not accepted at all. I had to try other cards and apps until something finally worked. Each time I stood there thinking: “If I was a total beginner, this would be the moment i give up.” I felt my own frustration rise, but at the same time I thought, this is good for my research. Now I do not just read about these pain points – I experience them with my own hands.
Route planning also showed interesting gaps. On the trip from Graz to Vienna I had some clear wishes. I wanted a charger with more than 300 kW so I do not have to wait too long. I wanted something with food nearby, because I was hungry. And I wanted a provider that is not SMATRICS, because I already had problems with them before. I thought these are basic, logical filters. But in the Audi system I could not filter for any of this. The car offers a nice tool that estimates how far I can still drive and suggests chargers on the way. Technically, this is very smart. But I could not set my own preferences. I could not select only “high‑power” chargers, or exclude specific networks, or search for stations with restaurants. I had to check everything manually, station by station.
Another missing detail was live information. Often it was not clear in the interface if a charger was free or busy. Sometimes I did not even see how many plugs the station had in total. For confidence this is important: if I drive ten minutes off the highway, I want to know if I really have a chance to plug in.
One of the most stressful moments happened when I came back to the car after charging. I wanted to unplug and continue my trip, but the connector was stuck and did not want to come out. The card did nothing anymore. I locked and unlocked the car several times and tried to pull with more and more force. After some minutes it finally released, but I never really understood which action solved it. For onboarding this is a nightmare: if something goes wrong, the system should clearly tell the user what to do, step by step. Here I had only trial and error.
Emotionally, these two weeks were a mix of curiosity, anger, and calm observation. In some moments I was really mad – especially when three small problems (finding a station, cable too short, card not accepted) came together. In other moments I felt almost grateful, because now I know these issues are not abstract. They really happen in everyday life, even with a premium car like an Audi Q4 e‑tron.
For my master thesis this impulse is very valuable. It helps me see how many barriers are not just software problems, but also physical design and service design problems: parking layout, cable reach, live status, contract jungle. It also shows how important personal preferences are. A good onboarding should not only explain “how to plug in”, but also support users in choosing the right charger for their needs: power, price, nearby services, and trust in the operator. These two weeks in the car gave me a much richer picture of what “first‑time public EV charging” really feels like – messy, fragile, but full of opportunities for better design. And I know imagine how a person that is less tech-savvier then me would do all these tasks. Crazy…
Last week I spent hours scrolling through Reddit, Trustpilot and German EV forums like GoingElectric. I was looking for honest user stories about public charging, not this polished marketing stuff, but real frustration, real emotions. what I found is exactly what my master thesis needs to understand.
The most striking thing is not just that things break. It is the feeling behind it. One user on Reddit wrote something like: “I used to have range anxiety. Now I have charger anxiety.” Another person mentioned they estimate 25 to 50 percent of their public charging sessions go wrong somehow – either the charger does not start, the cable gets stuck, or the app crashes. One user tried four times to charge at an Ionity station, typing in their credit card each time. Nothing worked. They called the hotline and were told “Your car is broken.” It was not. https://www.trustpilot.com/review/ionity.eu
What surprised me most is how stressed people feel before they even arrive at a station. They do not know if it will work. They do not know what it will cost. On Trustpilot, someone paid 73€ to charge from 2% to 70% battery and then the support person told them this was normal. Normal! One person wrote: “Why does it have to be 10 times more complicated than buying diesel?”
I noticed a pattern of main problems:
Payment chaos Different cards, different apps, unclear pricing. Pre-authorizations that get stuck and take weeks to refund. One person had 40 pounds taken from their account three times and then had to wait seven days for each refund.
Technical failures Chargers that start but stop after one minute. Cables that lock and won’t unlock. Had this problem also often by myself! Really frustrating when the cable is stuck and locked. App screens that freeze for 30 seconds. About 25% of payment readers broken. Half of the remaining chargers “freeze up” at least once.
No clear instructions People write things like “I wasted 15 minutes trying to figure out how to start charging. No step-by-step. Just… chaos.” One person said nobody explains what order to do things in – lock the car first, or plug in first? Nobody knows.
Emotional states The feeling is stressed, frustrated, sometimes angry. One comment said “beyond frustrating.” Others use words like “rip-off” and “scandal.” I also noticed something interesting: people who figured out a workaround share it like a secret tip. One person discovered you have to turn off your car, exit, lock it, unlock it again, THEN plug in. This should not be a secret. This should be obvious. https://www.reddit.com/r/ElectricVehiclesUK/comments/1q35bo8/if_range_anxiety_isnt_the_real_issue_whats/
For my thesis, this is gold. These are real first-time users (or experienced ones still struggling) describing exactly what breaks down in their mental model and confidence. They did not expect charging to be so complicated. They expected it to work like gasoline – simple, clear, fast.
I also found that Austria is not special in this problem. The same complaints come from the UK, Germany, Netherlands. It is a European-wide issue.
What does this mean now for my own research? It tells me that onboarding is not just about the touchpoint where the user stands at the station. It starts with trust. Will this station work? What will it cost? How do I do this? The first-time user is already anxious before they arrive. My job is to design away that anxiety, as i often mention through clear guidance, transparent pricing, and step-by-step help across all touchpoints: the app, the car, the station, the website.
These user voices of these forums was really worth reading through and gave me new pain points i havent thought about yet and will definetly help me for the thesis. They are reminding me: design for the stressed, confused person. Not for someone who has charged 100 times.
Disclaimer: This blog post uses real quotes and themes paraphrased from public Reddit discussions, Trustpilot reviews and forum posts. No direct copy-paste was used, but the emotional tone and pain points are taken directly from user experiences shared online. AI (Perplexity) was used to better and faster find these forums in the internet.
This master project explores how first‑time users can charge an electric car at public charging stations in a simple and confident way. I focus on the Audi UI and look at the whole journey: finding a charger in the app, using the in‑car system and interacting with the charger on site. With interviews, observations and usability tests, I study where people get stuck, feel stressed or unsure. The matrix in the image shows how my aims, objectives, methods and expected outcomes connect and guide the design of better onboarding experiences.
Research Question: How can first-time users be effectively onboarded for public electric vehicle charging stations to ensure successful completion of their initial charging session and build confidence for future use?
To answer the central research question a mixed-methods approach combining literature review, qualitative user research and onboarding design evaluation is employed. This approach is justified because effective onboarding requires understanding: (1) what barriers first-time users face during initial public charging encounters, (2) which onboarding interventions reduce these barriers and (3) whether designed solutions actually build user confidence for repeated use. Single-method investigation cannot adequately address this complexity.
This thesis is grounded in an interpretivist, user-centered research paradigm, assuming that first-time charging experiences cannot be understood only through technical performance metrics but must be interpreted through users perceptions, emotions and interpretive processes. The work therefore draws primarily on qualitative HCI theory, learnability models and onboarding research that explain how people approach unfamiliar systems and how confidence develops through interaction.
Albert, Bill, and Tom Tullis. Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics. 2nd ed. Morgan Kaufmann, 2013.
Aichinger, Wolfgang, Nadine Appelhans, Julian Gerlach, Jürgen Gies, Stefanie Hanke, Anne Klein-Hitpass, and Thomas Warnecke. „Elektromobilität in der kommunalen Umsetzung – Kommunale Strategien und planerische Instrumente.“ Technical Report. Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (DIFU), 2015. https://starterset-elektromobilität.de/sites/default/files/Dokumente/Elektromobilitaet_in_der_kommunalen_Umsetzung.pdf.
Bevan, Nigel, and Michelle Macleod. „Usability Measurement in Context.“ Behaviour and Information Technology 13, no. 2 (1994): 132–145. https://www.academia.edu/1962544/Usability_measurement_in_context
Beringer, D. B., and J. G. Peterson. „Underlying Behavioral Parameters of the Operation of Touch-Input Devices: Biases, Models, and Feedback.“ Human Factors 27, no. 4 (1985): 445–458.
Bundesverband Elektromobilität Österreich (BEÖE), „Neuzulassungen E-Autos (BEV) in Österreich,“ accessed December 2, 2025, https://www.beoe.at/neuzulassungen/
Choi, B. R., W. P. Lee, and D. J. Won. „Optimal Charging Strategy Based on Model Predictive Control in Electric Vehicle Parking Lots Considering Voltage Stability.“ Energies 11, no. 7 (2018): 1812. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11071812.
Davis, Fred D. „Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.“ MIS Quarterly 13, no. 3 (1989): 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.
Designability and Motability. Accessible EV Charging: Scoping and Discovery Report. United Kingdom, 2021.
eCharge4Drivers Consortium. eCharge4Drivers D1.2: A Priori Users‘ Concerns and Expectations Relevant to EV Charging. Project Report, Version 1.0 FINAL, 2023.
Figenbaum, Erik, et al. “Empirical Analysis of the User Needs and the Business Models in the
Norwegian Charging Infrastructure Ecosystem.” World Electr. Veh. J. 13, no. 10 (2022)
Grossman, Tovi, George Fitzmaurice, and Ramtin Attar. “A Survey of Software Learnability: Metrics, Methodologies, and Guidelines.” In CHI ’09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 649–658. New York: ACM, 2009.
Guo, Jianfeng, Binbin Xu, Qi Cao, Siyao Liu, Fu Gu, and Xuemei Zhang. „Unveiling the Bidirectional Link Between Electric Vehicle Sales and Charging Infrastructure: Evidence from 95 Cities in China.“ iScience 27, no. 3 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.111245.
Han, Tye. „Learnability and EV: Improving First-Time Electric Vehicle User Experience of Learning on Electrification Functions.“ Master‘s thesis, Södertörn University, 2023.
Hardman, Scott, Alan Jenn, Gil Tal, Jonn Axsen, George Beard, Nicolo Daina, Erik Figenbaum, et al. „A Review of Consumer Preferences of and Interactions with Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure.“ Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 62 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.04.002.
ISO 9241-11:2018. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction – Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts. International Organization for Standardization.
Krug, Steve. Don‘t Make Me Think, Revisited: A Common Sense Approach to Web & Mobile Usability. New Riders, 2014.
Lee, Dong-Yeon, Melanie H. McDermott, Benjamin K. Sovacool, and Raphael Isaac. „Toward Just and Equitable Mobility: Socioeconomic and Perceptual Barriers for Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure in the United States.“ Energy and Climate Change 5 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2024.100146.
Linja-aho, Merja. Learnability Assessment of Complex ICT Systems: Iterative Design-Validation Cycle. Doctoral dissertation, University of Oulu, 2006.
Ma, Jun, and Qinrui Yang. „Research on User Satisfaction of Charging Infrastructure.“ IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 440 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/440/3/032078.
Nielsen, Jakob. Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. New Riders Publishing, 2000.
Norman, Don. The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. Basic Books, 2013.
Ries, Eric. The Lean Startup: How Modern Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. Crown Business, 2011.
Rubin, Jeffrey, and Dana Chisnell. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Usability Testing. 2nd ed. Wiley Publishing, 2008.
Story, Molly Follette, James L. Mueller, and Ronald L. Mace. The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities. The Center for Universal Design, 1998.
Tullis, Tom S., and Jacqueline N. Stetson. „A Comparison of Questionnaires for Assessing Website Usability.“ In Proceedings of the Usability Professionals Association Conference, 1–12. Minneapolis: Usability Professionals Association, 2004.
UDG Consortium. Universal Design Guidelines for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure. Policy and Design Report. Ireland/European, 2024.
Venkatesh, V., and F. D. Davis. „A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies.“ Management Science 46, no. 2 (2000): 186–204.
Wang, Hengsong, Qi Huang, Changhua Zhang, and Aihua Xia. „A Novel Approach for the Layout of Electric Vehicle Charging Station.“ In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Apperceiving Computing and Intelligence Analysis (ICACIA), 64–70. IEEE, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACIA.2010.5743443.
Wang, Yingwei, and Chuan-Ren Wang. „Locating Passenger Vehicle Refueling Stations.“ Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 46, no. 5 (2010): 791–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2010.02.007.
Yang, Mengqi, and Boqiang Lin. „The Development of Consumer Preferences for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in China: Evidence from a Questionnaire Survey with a Four-Year Interval.“ Energy 307 (2024): 132671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.132671.
Zheng, Jian, Xingang Wang, Ke Men, and Yonghua Song. „Aggregation Model-Based Optimization for Electric Vehicle Charging Strategy.“ IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid 4, no. 2 (2013): 1058–1066. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2013.2244904.
Recently I spent some time exploring the Audi Innovation pages, especially the content about e‑mobility, digital services and the Audi charging hub. At first I just wanted to understand what Audi is doing with fast charging. But after reading more, I realized that this material is also very relevant for my master thesis as I want to do the prototyping within the AUDI Design System.
One key topic for me is how Audi understands charging as a complete experience, not only as a technical process. On the Audi charging hub site, they describe the hub as a premium place where drivers can charge quickly and relax in a lounge at the same time. The charging cubes store energy with second‑life batteries and can be moved and rebuilt in different cities. I find this interesting because it shows a clear link between infrastructure design, sustainability and user comfort. For my research, this confirms that charging is more than a plug and a screen. It is a service environment that can reduce or increase stress for especially first‑time users.
Audi also focuses strongly on urban users who do not have private charging at home, which im also focusing in (Public EV Charging). The charging hub gives them reliable fast charging and extra services like parcel delivery and battery changing for small vehicles. This makes me think about my own personas and journey maps. All of my interview plans already consider users without private parking. The Audi concept suggests that I should look more closely at how “extra services” around the main task can support confidence. For example, clear staff presence or a comfortable waiting area might make it easier for a nervous first‑time user to ask for help.
Another connection to my thesis is Audi’s work on a seamless digital ecosystem. On their pages about digital products and the myAudi app, they describe how drivers can plan routes with charging stops at home and then send them directly to the car. For EV drivers, the app becomes a smart buddy that manages charging contracts, plug & charge features and battery pre‑conditioning. In my research question I ask how onboarding can guide first‑time users from station discovery to successful departure. The Audi ecosystem shows one possible answer: onboarding does not start at the station, it starts earlier in the app and in the car. This impulse motivates me to design my prototypes across multiple touchpoints, not only the station display.
The Audi charging hub examples also give me concrete design inspiration. The barrier‑free layout in Zurich, with wide spaces and flexible swivel arms, clearly tries to remove physical and cognitive barriers. In my own study I plan observations at public stations to see where people actually struggle. The hub design suggests some variables I should pay attention to during fieldwork: parking space width, cable reach, height of displays, clarity of signs and the feeling of safety when moving around the car. These details can directly affect whether a first‑time user feels in control.
For my future research steps, this impulse has three main impacts. First, it pushes me to treat charging as a holistic service, where architecture, services and digital interfaces work together. Second, it encourages me to integrate an OEM perspective into my interviews, for example by asking about expectations formed by car brands and apps like myAudi. Third, it gives me ideas for design principles: create a “hub” feeling even at simple public stations, maybe through small but clear cues like reserved beginner bays, simple reservation flows, or micro‑lounges that communicate “you are welcome here”.
In summary, exploring the Audi Innovation Lab was more than just browsing a corporate website. It gave me a real picture of how a leading OEM imagines premium charging, both physically and digitally. This impulse will help me align my thesis with realistic industry directions, while still keeping a critical, user‑centred view on what first‑time EV users actually need to feel confident during their first public charging session.
During this semester, we had the course Future Design Lab by Raphaela Egger. The class focuses on future thinking, system analysis and understanding complexity in design processes. This course made me reflect deeply on my Master thesis topic, as it is also related to emerging technologies, innovation and future-oriented design.
My Master thesis deals with user experience and onboarding processes in public electric vehicle (EV) charging systems. EV charging is a relatively new and still evolving field. Many users experience uncertainty, confusion and frustration when using public charging infrastructure for the first time. Because of this I strongly connected the content of Future Design Lab with my own research topic and cam to the point that i definetly should write an impulse about it to also reflect on it.
A central method we learned in the course is system analysis, which helps to understand how different elements influence each other. A useful framework for this is the 5R Model, consisting of Resources, Rules, Roles, Relations and Results. Applying this model to my thesis topic gave me new insights.
Resources in the EV charging system include technical infrastructure, digital interfaces, user data, electricity, time, and the users’ attention and cognitive capacity. Especially for first-time users, mental resources such as confidence and trust play a crucial role.
Rules are defined by charging standards, payment systems, regulations, pricing models, and platform-specific requirements. These rules often differ between providers, which creates inconsistency and confusion during onboarding.
Roles include EV drivers, charging station providers, app developers, energy companies, municipalities, and designers. Each role has different responsibilities and levels of power within the system.
Relations describe how these roles interact. For example, users depend on apps and stations working together, while providers depend on regulations and technical standards. Poor coordination between these relations often leads to negative user experiences.
Results are the outcomes of the system, such as successful charging, user satisfaction, trust in e-mobility, or in negative cases frustration, abandonment and anxiety. These results influence whether users are willing to adopt electric mobility in the future.
Through the Future Design Lab, I realized that onboarding is not only about explaining how something works. It is also about reducing uncertainty in a system that is still changing. This is where future thinking becomes highly relevant. Future thinking encourages designers to accept uncertainty and design solutions that are flexible, robust and supportive during transitions.
This impulse has influenced my research approach significantly. I now see onboarding as a strategic design intervention that helps users navigate complex systems during technological change. It also strengthened my decision to use system mapping and user journey analysis as part of my methodology.
This course of Future Design Lab gave me an important impulse for my Master thesis by helping me to think deeper and my perspective from interface design to system-oriented and future-oriented thinking. It helped me understand that good user experience in emerging technologies depends not only on usability, but on how well designers understand and shape the systems behind it.
For my fourth impulse I focused on recent challenges in EV charging that question my initial research direction. I watched a podcast with Andrea Caviglia, Head of Global Product Management at Nidec, a major player in e-mobility charging solutions and brainstormed next research steps with the support of Perplexity. This reflection brings together my notes from the video and critical thoughts about my Master thesis after learning about Plug & Charge technology.
Andrea explained that many EV user experience challenges remain despite technical progress. The core problem is that charging is still a new technology creating friction, fear, and anxiety for users. Two main challenges he highlighted in video are “range anxiety” (thats the fear of not reaching the next charger) and the time users have to spend at chargers. This means the charging process must be fast and the waiting time should be used well. The interface (charger and app) should be intuitive and show clear real-time updates about charging status, kilowatts used, time remaining.
This confirms my thesis focus: user experience is central, but also complex and emotional, not just technical. Andrea mentioned multiple payment options are common in EV charging, with app subscriptions, RFID, credit cards, and even QR codes being used to make payments simple and flexible. This aligns with what I know, but also shows how the ecosystem is still diverse without a fully unified system.
The video also explained the fast-paced nature of the e-mobility market, constantly evolving with new charging standards like “mega charging” for buses and trucks. It showed that product design must carefully consider all touchpoints, ensuring hardware reliability, simplicity, and real-time communication within the IoT ecosystem. This means robust, user-friendly solutions are essential for customer satisfaction and reuse.
One highlight relevant for me is how Plug & Charge works. This new technology allows cars to register automatically and start charging on connection without manual steps to start or pay. This sounds like a great UX improvement but also challenges my thesis. If charging becomes nearly effortless for users, will detailed work on charging interfaces even be necessary?
I concluded that while Plug & Charge reduces friction at one stage, many other UX challenges remain:
Where and how do users find chargers?
How do they trust the charger and its status through app or physical signals?
How inclusive and accessible are stations for all users?
How can the waiting time be designed as valuable time?
How do users handle errors or machine failures?
So, Plug & Charge is part of the solution but not the whole picture. For my next research steps, I want expand my focus beyond “start and pay UX” to the full charging experience ecosystem, including location, trust, accessibility and also cognitive/emotional factors.
I also openly admit that after watching this and discussing with AI (Perplexity), I had to rethink and refine my thesis topic and methods. I realize that being flexible and critically examining assumptions is crucial in fast-moving tech fields.
Next steps I will pursue:
Refine my research questions to cover the broader user experience, not only payment and session start
Include qualitative interviews that explore user fears, waiting time use and trust in automated systems
Consider field visits to observe real user interactions with Plug & Charge and older systems
Study accessibility and inclusivity aspects from both tech and human factors
Follow the evolving standardization and AI integration in charging ecosystems
At the end i can really say that these impulse right now are really helpful for me to get my arse up and start doing something for the thesis because learning of these new technologies now is shifting my recent state of research to a really new approach. So this really deepened my understanding now and clarified that my thesis can add value by focusing on the unexplored parts beyond Plug & Charge’s convenience.
For my third impulse, I watched the podcast episode “The Role of AI in Electric Vehicle Charging” with Diego Pareschi from ABB E-mobility. It was my first time listening to someone who actually designs global charging products, not just talking from theory. This felt very relevant for my Master thesis about the User Experience of EV charging, because he connected UX, AI and business in a very clear way.
Diego started by saying that EV charging is still not easy and not frictionless. There is so much to optimize in user experience, energy efficiency and software. This confirmed something I already felt: the problems are not only technical, but also human. People are confused, frustrated or anxious when charging. For my research, this is an important starting point: I am not just designing a nicer interface, I am working in a system that still has a lot of friction.
He explained the key problems step by step. First, location: drivers often have trouble just finding where a charger is. Second, reliability: will the charger actually work when I arrive? Third, compatibility: does this station work with my specific car and plug? Then waiting times and payment: how long do I need to charge and how can I pay (app, subscription, credit card)? I realised that my own interviews and surveys must cover exactly these pain points. If I ignore one of them, my picture of the user experience will not be complete.
The discussion about standards was also interesting. There are different plugs and standards around the world (CCS1, CCS2, etc.), and then Tesla introduced NACS. Diego compared it to USB and USB-C. For users, this means less cognitive load if the plugs are more standardised. This connects directly to interaction design: the fewer decisions the user has to make before charging, the better. In my thesis I can link physical standardisation (plugs) with digital standardisation (more consistent interfaces across providers).
The most inspiring and also new knowledge gaining part for me was how AI is used. Diego described projects with universities where they analysed user behaviour and location together. They look at how long people charge, how much energy they take, what kind of errors happen (for example, payment failures because the user needs too long to find a credit card) and where the station is placed (near cinema, restaurant, supermarket, gas station). With clustering they created “profiles” of charging behaviour linked to points of interest. This shows that behaviour at a restaurant charger is very different from behaviour at a charger near a cinema or gas station.
For my research, this is a big insight: context matters a lot. A 30–40 minute charging session becomes acceptable or even pleasant if the location fits the user’s plans. So when I design my prototype or interview guide, I must always ask: “Where is the user? What are they doing while the car is charging?” Not only “What does the screen look like?”.
Diego also talked about inclusivity. He said EV charging is complex and new, but “simplicity is the real innovation”. That sentence stayed in my mind. There are standards like ADA for accessibility, but they had to be adapted to fit real charging situations. He mentioned design elements like lights: even if the screen is confusing, everybody understands green (available) and red (problem). This is a strong reminder for my thesis: good UX is not only about detailed menus, sometimes a clear light signal can support or even replace text for stressed users or people with limited tech skills.
Overall, this video gave me an important impulse: my research should not only focus on what happens on the screen, but also on the whole ecosystem around it like location, behaviour, inclusivity and even future AI-supported services. In my next steps, I want to use these ideas to refine my interview questions: I will ask users not just “How did you use the charger?”, but also “Where were you, what did you do while chargin, and what made the experience feel easy or hard?”. This will help me move closer to the real, messy, human experience of EV charging.
AI disclaimer: AI was used to help structure and formulate this blog post.
Observing the User Experience – Book from Mr Baumann
Last week I challenged myself to read “Observing the User Experience” (Goodman, Kuniavsky, Moed, 2012). This was not easy, but necessary, because my Master’s research depends on strong qualitativ methods. The book is known in the UX community and the authors are recognized experts, as Mr Baumann told me (He owns this book and borrowed it to me). When I borrowed it, my plan was to dive deeper into UX research methods and figure out which techniques are honest and suitable for my thesis, not just the easiest way to get quick results.
What I read and learned
The book is well structured and does a good job keeping things clear, organized and easy to navigate. It offers an overview of many UX methods but for my research, I was most interested in Chapter 6 (Interviewing), Chapter 9 (Field Visits and Observation) and also Chapter 12 (Surveys). In Chapter 6, I learned about how to select the right people for interviews: there are three steps to do this → define the target group, find representatives, and convince them to join. The most important filter is user behavior, not demographics or random criteria.
The part about structuring interviews gave me a simple but powerful model:
Start every interview with a short introduction and make clear you are a neutral, professional and respectful partner
Warm-Up: Help the user focus and step away from daily routine.
Ask general questions about their experiences, expectations and opinions.
Go deeper with specific questions on the product or service.
Always wrap up so participants are not left confused or stressed.
I realized that many surveys and interviews fail because researchers do not prepare correct (who to ask, how to ask, what order to ask things). The books structure for interviews (S. 129f) actually makes it much easier for me to plan honest conversations that show the real pain and frustration users have, not just surface level feedback.
Why is this important for my Master Thesis?
I want my research about the User Experience of EV Charging to be meaningful: not just collecting some survey numbers and simple opinions, but really finding out where users struggle, what confuses them, what they need and what can I improve. This is only possible if I use well designed or/and structured interviews and observations. Just sending out a Google Form will never be enough.
Because EV charging is both a technical and emotional experience (as I wrote in Impulse #1), interviews and field visits help me to see both sides. Users might tell me about real technical problems (errors, slow speed, location issues), but also about fears and annoyances that are invisible in hard data. The book convinced me that i need to pick honest, difficult methods, not just “easy” online surveys. Obviously online surveys arent always that “easy” but you know what i mean 😉
Taking action for my Research
For my next steps I want to:
carefully plan my user interviews using the structures from the book
not just ask easy questions. I want to challenge users to speak about pain, failures, and surprising moments
use a mix of interviews and onsite observations at charging stations. (maybe for a next impulse event i could actually observe a EV Station for one or more hours)
I must recruit the RIGHT people: real EV drivers with different backgrounds and experiences.
My goal is now clear that i not only want data as research, but direct contact and uncomfortable truths. This will make my Master Thesis stronger and more useful for future designers and researchers.
References:
Goodman, Elizabeth, Mike Kuniavsky, and Andrea Moed. Observing the User Experience: A Practitioner’s Guide to User Research. 2nd ed. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann, 2012.
AI Disclaimer: AI helped to brainstorm, review structure, and improve clarity.
