Interview Questions for User Experience (UX) in Exhibit Design

Designing for diverse demographics in exhibit design requires a deep understanding of the target audience’s needs, preferences, and abilities. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach. For example, an exhibit for children will drastically differ from one designed for senior citizens.

• Children: Exhibits for children prioritize interactive elements, bright colors, simple language, and hands-on activities to engage their shorter attention spans and encourage exploration. I might incorporate playful sounds, tactile elements, and gamified experiences.
• Adults: Adult exhibits can be more information-dense, but clarity and compelling storytelling remain key. We might use sophisticated visuals, detailed text panels, and multimedia presentations, catering to varied learning styles.
• Seniors: Accessibility is paramount for senior visitors. This means larger fonts, high contrast colors, well-lit spaces, seating areas, and audio descriptions for those with visual impairments. I might also consider incorporating tactile elements and interactive displays with larger buttons and clear instructions.
• Individuals with Disabilities: Universal design principles are crucial. This includes providing alternative text for images, transcripts for audio, and tactile maps. Careful consideration of physical space and navigation is critical to ensure inclusivity.

Essentially, I employ user personas – detailed representations of each target demographic – to guide every design decision, ensuring the exhibit resonates with each group.

User research is fundamental to successful exhibit design. I use a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative research techniques.

• Surveys and Questionnaires: These help gauge visitor preferences, interests, and prior knowledge on the topic. This data provides valuable insights into their expectations and learning styles.
• Focus Groups: These allow for in-depth discussions with representative samples of the target audience. This is essential for understanding their responses to potential exhibit elements.
• Card Sorting: This technique helps organize information hierarchically, allowing us to structure the exhibit’s content in a user-friendly manner.
• Usability Testing: I conduct usability testing with representative users to evaluate the effectiveness and intuitiveness of design prototypes. This includes observing user interactions and gathering feedback.
• A/B Testing: If possible, we test alternative design solutions with similar groups to identify which performs better.

The data gathered informs every design decision, from content organization and layout to interactive elements and overall experience.

Information architecture in exhibit design is all about organizing and presenting information in a clear, logical, and intuitive manner. It’s like creating a roadmap for the visitor’s journey.

My approach begins with creating a sitemap, outlining the main topics and subtopics to be covered. Then, I develop a clear hierarchy, connecting related information and ensuring a logical flow. This might involve:

• Categorization: Grouping related exhibits or artifacts based on themes, timelines, or geographic locations.
• Labeling: Using clear and concise labels for exhibits and interactive displays.
• Wayfinding: Implementing effective signage and wayfinding systems to guide visitors through the exhibit space.
• Navigation: Designing intuitive navigation tools, such as interactive kiosks or digital maps, that allow visitors to easily find information and explore at their own pace.

I use card sorting to validate the information architecture with the target audience, ensuring that the structure resonates with their expectations and allows for intuitive navigation.

Accessibility is a core principle in my design process. It’s not just about compliance; it’s about creating an inclusive experience for everyone.

• Visual Accessibility: This involves using high contrast colors, large fonts, clear and concise text, and alternative text for images. We provide captions for videos and audio descriptions for exhibits.
• Auditory Accessibility: This means offering transcripts of audio and visual content, and minimizing background noise.
• Physical Accessibility: We design exhibits with sufficient space for wheelchairs and other mobility devices. We provide ramps, elevators, and accessible restrooms. Tactile elements are provided for users with visual impairments.
• Cognitive Accessibility: This focuses on simplicity, clear instructions, and avoiding overwhelming information overload. We use a variety of communication styles to accommodate different learning styles.

We follow WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) principles as a benchmark for accessibility standards, adapting them appropriately for a physical exhibit context.

During the design of a historical exhibit on the American Revolution, we initially focused on a timeline-based approach, presenting events chronologically. However, post-usability testing with a diverse group of visitors, we discovered a significant issue. Users felt the timeline was overwhelming and lacked context. Many got lost in the sheer number of dates and events.

Based on the user feedback, we iterated on the design. We integrated a thematic approach alongside the timeline. We clustered events around key themes such as political tensions, social changes, and military campaigns. This provided more context and made the information easier to digest. We also incorporated interactive elements such as touchscreens allowing users to explore themes independently and at their own pace. This change significantly improved user engagement and comprehension.

Many UI design principles translate effectively to exhibit design. While we don’t have the same digital constraints, the core principles of user-centered design remain.

• Clarity and Simplicity: Information should be presented clearly and concisely. Avoid jargon and use plain language.
• Consistency: Maintain consistency in terms of visual style, navigation, and interaction design throughout the exhibit.
• Feedback and Affordances: Provide clear visual and tactile feedback to users’ actions. Design interactive elements with clear affordances, making it obvious how to use them.
• Visual Hierarchy: Use visual cues like size, color, and placement to guide the user’s attention to the most important information.
• Error Prevention: Design the exhibit in a way that minimizes opportunities for errors. Use clear labels and intuitive controls.

The goal is to create a seamless and intuitive user experience, guiding the visitors through the exhibit’s content effortlessly.

Measuring the success of an exhibit from a UX perspective involves a multi-faceted approach. We use both qualitative and quantitative data.

• Quantitative Metrics: These include visitor counts, dwell time at specific exhibits, and completion rates of interactive activities. We use analytics tools to track these metrics.
• Qualitative Metrics: These include visitor feedback through surveys, interviews, and observation studies. This helps us understand user satisfaction, engagement levels, and any usability issues encountered.
• Post-visit surveys: These gauge satisfaction, learning outcomes, and identify areas for improvement.
• Observation studies: Direct observation of visitor behavior provides insights into how they navigate the exhibit and interact with its elements.

By combining quantitative and qualitative data, we can gain a comprehensive understanding of the exhibit’s effectiveness in achieving its goals, both in terms of visitor experience and in terms of knowledge transfer.

Balancing aesthetics and usability in exhibit design is crucial for creating a positive visitor experience. It’s not a case of choosing one over the other; rather, it’s about finding a harmonious blend. Think of it like baking a cake: you need the right ingredients (aesthetics) and the correct recipe (usability) to achieve a delicious result.

Aesthetics encompass the visual appeal—the colors, typography, imagery, and overall design style. Usability, on the other hand, focuses on how easy and intuitive the exhibit is to navigate and understand. We achieve this balance through user research, iterative design, and consistent testing. For example, a visually stunning exhibit with cluttered information and confusing navigation is ultimately unsuccessful. Conversely, an exhibit that prioritizes usability over aesthetics might be functional but fail to engage visitors.

In practice, this balance is maintained through user testing and feedback. We might create multiple design iterations, each with varying levels of visual complexity, and observe which version best facilitates understanding and engagement. We analyze data on visitor dwell time at different sections, feedback forms, and even informal observation to fine-tune this balance.

Prototyping is an indispensable part of my exhibit design process. I utilize a range of methods, from low-fidelity prototypes like sketches and storyboards to high-fidelity interactive mockups created using software like Adobe XD or Figma. Low-fidelity prototypes are excellent for early brainstorming and quick iteration. They allow me to rapidly explore different layouts and concepts with stakeholders without significant time investment.

High-fidelity prototypes, on the other hand, allow for more detailed testing and user feedback. They let me simulate the actual exhibit experience, testing interactivity and navigation flows. For instance, I’ve used high-fidelity prototypes to test the responsiveness of touchscreen interfaces in a science museum exhibit, identifying and resolving issues like accidental touches or slow response times before construction.

Through prototyping, I can identify and address usability issues early in the design process, significantly reducing costs and time associated with rework later on. It’s a crucial tool for ensuring that the final exhibit meets the needs and expectations of its users.

Common usability issues in exhibit design often stem from a lack of clear direction or accessibility considerations. Some frequent problems include:

• Poor wayfinding: Visitors struggle to navigate the exhibit and find what they’re looking for due to confusing layouts or inadequate signage.
• Information overload: Too much text or complex information makes it difficult for visitors to process and retain key messages.
• Lack of accessibility: The exhibit isn’t designed to accommodate visitors with disabilities, such as those with visual or auditory impairments.
• Ineffective interactive elements: Interactive displays are poorly designed, unresponsive, or don’t enhance the overall learning experience.
• Poor lighting and visual hierarchy: Key information is not adequately highlighted, making it difficult to discern important details.

Addressing these issues requires a user-centered approach, involving user research, testing, and iterative design. By carefully considering these elements from the initial design stages, we can create exhibits that are both engaging and easily accessible to all visitors.

Conflicting design requirements are a common challenge in exhibit design. For instance, a client might want a highly interactive exhibit that also needs to be easily transported and cost-effective. These are often competing priorities.

My approach involves collaborative problem-solving through:

• Prioritization: We work with the client to prioritize the most essential requirements based on project goals and budget constraints. This involves open communication and transparent discussion.
• Compromise and negotiation: We explore alternative solutions that satisfy the core needs without compromising the overall exhibit experience. This might involve adjusting the scope or finding creative solutions.
• Data-driven decision making: We leverage user research and testing to guide decision-making, ensuring that design choices are informed by user needs. Data provides a common language for evaluating trade-offs.
• Iterative design process: We use an iterative process, testing and refining the design based on the feedback received, allowing for adjustments to accommodate differing priorities along the way.

By employing these strategies, we ensure that the final exhibit addresses the most critical needs while remaining feasible and effective within given constraints.

Interactive elements are crucial for enhancing user experience in exhibit design. They transform passive observation into active engagement, making learning more memorable and enjoyable. The key is to integrate them thoughtfully and purposefully, not just for the sake of interactivity.

Effective integration involves:

• Alignment with learning objectives: Interactive elements should directly support the exhibit’s narrative and educational goals. A simple quiz at the end of a section, for example, can reinforce key concepts.
• Intuitive design: Interactive features should be easy to understand and use, regardless of the user’s technological proficiency. Clear instructions and visual cues are crucial.
• Variety of interaction types: Offering diverse interactive experiences – touchscreens, physical manipulations, audio-visual elements – caters to different learning styles and preferences.
• Immediate feedback: Interactive elements should provide immediate feedback to the user, reinforcing their actions and enhancing engagement. For example, a game that shows a score immediately encourages continued participation.

In a recent project, we incorporated a large-scale touchscreen map allowing visitors to explore different ecosystems. The interactive map provided detailed information about each region upon selection and incorporated short videos and images, significantly enhancing the learning experience.

User flows in exhibit design describe the path a visitor takes through the exhibit space. Mapping these flows is essential to ensure a logical and engaging experience. It’s akin to creating a roadmap for the visitor’s journey.

We use various methods to map user flows, including:

• Site maps: High-level visual representations of the exhibit’s layout and key information points.
• Flowcharts: Detailed diagrams showing the sequence of actions and decisions a visitor might make while navigating the exhibit.
• Storyboarding: Visual narratives depicting the visitor’s experience at various points in the exhibit, helping to anticipate potential challenges.

Understanding user flows helps anticipate potential bottlenecks, ensure a smooth progression of information, and optimize the placement of interactive elements. A well-defined user flow guarantees a cohesive and impactful exhibit experience.

Ensuring an engaging and understandable narrative flow is paramount to a successful exhibit. The story needs to be clear, compelling, and easy to follow. It’s about guiding the visitor on a journey of discovery.

Key strategies for achieving this include:

• Compelling introduction: The exhibit must immediately grab the visitor’s attention and establish a clear purpose.
• Logical sequencing: Information should be presented in a logical and chronological order, building upon previous information to create a cohesive narrative.
• Clear visual cues: Visual elements, like signage, graphics, and spatial arrangements, should guide visitors through the exhibit and highlight key information.
• Variety of content formats: Combining text, images, videos, and interactive elements keeps the visitor engaged and caters to different learning styles.
• Memorable conclusion: The exhibit should end with a powerful message or takeaway that leaves a lasting impression on the visitor.

For example, in a historical exhibit, I would meticulously arrange artifacts and information panels to create a chronological timeline, adding visual cues and interactive elements to enhance comprehension and engagement. A compelling narrative arc, like a mystery to be solved, can make even complex information engaging and memorable for the visitor.

My experience with UX design software in exhibit design is extensive. I’m proficient in tools like Sketch, Figma, and Adobe XD for creating wireframes, mockups, and prototypes. These tools are crucial for visualizing the user flow and testing different design iterations before physical production. For example, in a recent science museum exhibit, I used Figma to design interactive kiosks, allowing me to collaborate with the development team seamlessly. The ability to share and comment on designs in real-time significantly improved efficiency and clarity. Beyond these core tools, I also utilize software like Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop for creating high-fidelity visuals and assets for the exhibit, ensuring a visually compelling and coherent experience.

Specifically, I leverage the prototyping capabilities of these platforms to simulate user interactions. For instance, I might create clickable prototypes of touchscreens to test the intuitive nature of the navigation and information architecture within the exhibit. This allows for early identification of usability issues and facilitates iterative improvements based on user feedback.

Evaluating wayfinding effectiveness in an exhibit is crucial for a positive user experience. I employ a multi-faceted approach involving observation, quantitative data analysis, and user feedback. Firstly, I observe visitors navigating the exhibit, noting any signs of confusion, hesitation, or frustration. Are they easily locating key areas? Do signage and maps effectively guide them? I look for bottlenecks or areas where people are repeatedly getting lost.

Secondly, I incorporate quantitative methods. This might involve strategically placing counters at various points to track visitor traffic flow, measuring the time it takes users to reach specific destinations, or using heatmaps to visually analyze visitor movement patterns. This data provides objective metrics to assess the efficiency of the wayfinding system.

Finally, I collect user feedback through post-visit surveys or informal interviews. I’ll ask questions such as, “How easy was it to find what you were looking for?” or “Was the signage clear and helpful?” This qualitative data complements the observational and quantitative insights, providing valuable context and user perspectives.

I’ve implemented several innovative UX solutions in my exhibit design work. For instance, in a history museum exhibit, we used augmented reality (AR) overlays on physical artifacts to enhance the visitor experience. Visitors could use their smartphones or tablets to access additional information, images, and even 3D models related to the artifacts, enriching their engagement and understanding. This allowed us to deliver a greater depth of information without overwhelming the physical space with text or displays.

Another example involved using personalized interactive experiences. In a science museum exhibit, we developed a kiosk system that adjusted the level of complexity and detail presented based on the user’s input and demonstrated understanding. This catered to diverse audiences – from children to experts – providing a more engaging and accessible experience for everyone. We used adaptive learning principles to tailor the content dynamically.

My user testing process in exhibit settings is carefully designed to be both unobtrusive and effective. It typically involves a mix of in-situ observation and structured interviews. Before the exhibit opens, I conduct usability testing with a diverse group of participants representing the target audience. This could be within a simulated exhibit environment or with a prototype.

During the testing, I observe how users interact with the exhibits and record their behavior, vocalizations, and any challenges encountered. I use a think-aloud protocol, encouraging participants to verbalize their thoughts and actions as they navigate the space. Following the observation, I conduct semi-structured interviews to delve deeper into their experiences, focusing on their understanding, satisfaction, and suggestions for improvement.

After the exhibit opens, I continue monitoring user interaction through observation and periodic surveys, allowing for ongoing evaluation and iterative refinements. This iterative approach ensures that the exhibit continuously meets the needs and expectations of its visitors.

Handling technical limitations is a common challenge in exhibit design. My approach involves proactive planning, creative problem-solving, and effective communication. Before the design phase begins, I thoroughly assess all technical constraints, including budget, technology availability, and environmental factors such as lighting and space restrictions.

If a desired technological solution proves infeasible due to budget limitations, I explore alternative approaches. For instance, instead of using high-end interactive projections, we might create engaging physical elements that provide a similar level of interaction, such as interactive touch tables with simpler technology.

Effective communication with engineers, developers, and contractors is key. Regular meetings and detailed specifications ensure that the design aligns with technological possibilities. This collaborative approach helps prevent costly mistakes and ensures the final product meets the design intent within the given technical limitations.

Incorporating storytelling is central to creating engaging and memorable exhibit experiences. I achieve this by developing a narrative arc that guides the visitor through the exhibit’s content. This narrative might unfold chronologically, thematically, or geographically, depending on the exhibit’s subject matter. Each element of the exhibit should contribute to the overall story, creating a cohesive and immersive experience.

For example, in a historical exhibit, I might structure the narrative around a specific historical event, using interactive elements, artifacts, and multimedia displays to guide the visitor through the unfolding story. Strong visual storytelling, using compelling imagery and graphic design, is equally crucial. It helps to create an emotional connection with the visitor and strengthen the narrative’s impact. The design should be thoughtfully paced and guide visitors through the story without overwhelming them with information.

My preferred methods for gathering user feedback are multifaceted and adaptable to the specific context of the exhibit. I utilize a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods for a holistic understanding. Post-visit surveys are a valuable tool for collecting feedback on specific aspects of the experience, such as clarity, engagement, and overall satisfaction. These surveys can be both online and paper-based, allowing for flexibility in administration.

In addition to surveys, I conduct on-site observations, noting visitor behavior and interactions with the exhibits. This helps identify areas that may need improvement or clarification. Informal interviews with visitors offer rich qualitative data, providing deeper insights into their experiences. This is particularly useful for understanding the emotional responses and interpretations of the exhibit’s content.

Finally, I employ analytics tools where applicable. Interactive kiosks or digital displays can provide data on user engagement, helping to identify what elements are most and least popular. This quantitative data complements the qualitative data from surveys and interviews, creating a more comprehensive picture of the user experience.

Designing for multi-sensory experiences in exhibits is crucial for creating truly engaging and memorable visitor interactions. It moves beyond just visual displays to encompass all five senses – sight, sound, touch, smell, and even taste (where appropriate). My approach begins with a deep understanding of the exhibit’s content and target audience. I then brainstorm how each sense can enhance the narrative and learning experience.

• Sight: This is the most obvious, involving high-quality visuals, compelling graphics, and effective use of lighting and color to create atmosphere and guide the visitor’s eye.
• Sound: Audio elements can range from ambient soundscapes that set the mood to informative audio guides and interactive sound effects that respond to user actions. Careful consideration of volume and placement is key to prevent auditory overload.
• Touch: Interactive elements like touchscreens, tactile models, or textured surfaces can make the experience more engaging and memorable. For example, a historical exhibit might include a replica of a tool that visitors can handle.
• Smell: While less frequently used, carefully chosen scents can powerfully evoke emotions and memories. Imagine a botanical exhibit subtly infusing the air with the scent of blooming flowers.
• Taste: In food-related exhibits or cultural experiences, carefully selected tastes can heighten the overall sensory experience. However, careful hygiene and logistical considerations are crucial.

For example, in a museum exhibit on ancient civilizations, we might combine high-resolution images of artifacts with ambient sounds of a bustling marketplace, textured replicas of pottery for visitors to touch, and even a subtle scent of incense to create an immersive and historically accurate atmosphere. The key is thoughtful integration, ensuring each sensory element complements and enhances the others without overwhelming the visitor.

Ensuring the sustainability and longevity of an exhibit’s UX design requires a multifaceted approach that considers both technological advancements and evolving audience expectations. It’s not just about creating something that works today; it’s about creating something adaptable for the future.

• Modular Design: Breaking down the exhibit into smaller, interchangeable modules allows for easier updates and adaptation to new content or technologies. Imagine individual panels that can be easily replaced or updated with new information.
• Technology Agnosticism: Avoiding reliance on proprietary or rapidly obsolescing technologies is crucial. Where possible, using open standards and widely supported platforms ensures longevity. For instance, using HTML5 for interactive elements instead of relying on a specific, quickly outdated software.
• Content Management Systems (CMS): Employing a CMS allows for easy updating of textual and multimedia content without requiring extensive re-design of the entire exhibit. This reduces long-term maintenance costs.
• Accessibility Considerations: Designing for accessibility from the outset ensures the exhibit remains usable for a broader audience, including those with disabilities, for years to come. This extends the exhibit’s overall reach and value.
• Regular User Feedback: Collecting data and feedback from visitors over time is vital to identify areas for improvement and adaptation. This could involve surveys, interviews, or observational studies. Adjustments made based on user input increase the exhibit’s relevance and engagement.

By embracing these strategies, we can create exhibits that remain engaging and relevant for a far longer time, maximizing their impact and value for the institution and the public.

Exhibit design is inherently a fast-paced environment with tight deadlines and multiple stakeholders. Effective time management and prioritization are essential. My approach involves a combination of strategic planning, agile methodologies, and effective communication.

• Detailed Project Planning: Creating a comprehensive project plan with clearly defined milestones, tasks, and timelines is paramount. This plan serves as a roadmap and helps to stay organized and focused.
• Agile Workflows: Employing an iterative, agile approach allows for flexibility and adaptability to changing requirements or unexpected challenges. This involves breaking down large tasks into smaller, manageable sprints.
• Prioritization Matrix: Using a prioritization matrix (like a MoSCoW method – Must have, Should have, Could have, Won’t have) helps to focus efforts on the most critical tasks first. This ensures that core functionalities and key user experiences are delivered on time.
• Effective Communication: Regular communication with the team and stakeholders is key to maintaining transparency and addressing potential issues proactively. This includes regular meetings, progress reports, and open channels for feedback.
• Time Blocking: Allocating specific blocks of time for focused work on particular tasks minimizes distractions and promotes efficiency. This technique allows me to manage interruptions effectively and stay on track.

For instance, I might dedicate Monday mornings to research and planning, Tuesday and Wednesday to design work, and Thursday and Friday to client communication and revisions. This structured approach enables efficient time management in a dynamic project environment.

My strengths lie in my ability to blend deep user-centered design principles with a strong understanding of the physical constraints and logistical considerations of exhibit design. I excel at creating intuitive and engaging user experiences that are also practical and feasible to implement.

• Strength: User Research and Empathy: I am highly skilled in conducting user research, translating user needs into design solutions, and creating experiences that resonate with the target audience.
• Strength: Problem-Solving and Innovation: I thrive on challenges and find creative solutions to complex design problems, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in exhibit design.
• Strength: Collaboration and Communication: I’m a strong collaborator and communicator, fostering effective teamwork and keeping stakeholders informed throughout the design process.

One area for development is my familiarity with certain emerging technologies. While I’m always learning, dedicating more time to exploring cutting-edge technologies in interactive displays and data visualization would strengthen my skillset even further.

Staying current in the rapidly evolving fields of UX and exhibit design is crucial. My approach involves a multi-pronged strategy that combines active learning with networking and community engagement.

• Industry Publications and Conferences: I regularly read industry publications, attend conferences, and participate in workshops to learn about the latest trends, technologies, and best practices. This keeps me aware of emerging innovations and design patterns.
• Online Courses and Webinars: I utilize online platforms for learning, completing relevant courses and attending webinars to deepen my expertise in specific areas like interaction design and accessibility.
• Professional Networking: I actively engage with the design community through online forums, professional organizations, and networking events. This allows me to learn from others, share ideas, and stay informed about industry developments.
• Case Study Analysis: I regularly review case studies of successful exhibit designs, analyzing the design decisions and the rationale behind them. This helps to understand what works and what doesn’t, informing my own approach.

By combining these strategies, I ensure I maintain a high level of knowledge and expertise in UX and exhibit design.

In a project designing an interactive exhibit about the solar system for a children’s museum, we faced a challenge in balancing engagement with educational accuracy. Children quickly lost interest in the initial design which was primarily text-heavy with static visuals.

To solve this, we employed a user-centered design approach involving:

• User Testing with Children: We conducted usability testing with our target audience – children aged 6-12 – to observe their interaction with the exhibit and identify pain points.
• Gamification: We introduced gamification elements like a points-based system and challenges to encourage interaction and maintain engagement.
• Multi-sensory Design: We incorporated multi-sensory elements like audio narration, interactive touchscreens, and even a simulated “spacewalk” using motion sensors and projected visuals. The result was a significantly more engaging and educational experience.
• Iterative Design: Based on feedback from the user testing, we iteratively refined the design, making adjustments to improve engagement and learning outcomes.

The revised exhibit proved a huge success, demonstrating the power of user-centered design and iterative development in solving complex UX problems.

Effective collaboration is crucial in exhibit design, where multiple disciplines converge. My approach focuses on clear communication, shared understanding, and mutual respect.

• Regular Team Meetings: Holding frequent meetings allows for open communication, addressing concerns and coordinating efforts across different teams (designers, engineers, content creators).
• Collaborative Design Tools: Using shared online design tools enables real-time collaboration and efficient feedback sharing. This streamlines the design process and promotes transparency.
• Clear Roles and Responsibilities: Defining roles and responsibilities from the outset prevents confusion and ensures each team member understands their contribution. A well-defined project structure is crucial for success.
• Constructive Feedback: Providing and receiving constructive criticism is vital for continuous improvement. Creating a safe space for feedback ensures that suggestions are received positively and contribute to the overall quality of the exhibit.
• Shared Vision: Ensuring a shared understanding of the exhibit’s goals and target audience is key to aligning efforts and promoting a cohesive design.

For example, I might use project management software like Asana or Trello to track progress, share files, and communicate with team members. This centralized approach maintains project organization and fosters seamless collaboration.