As our group advanced through the stages of the problem definition process, there were noteworthy takeaways we considered along the way. At least in our case, it was important to go through each step (create a persona, a mind map, identify problem areas, etc.) thoroughly and sequentially. Without first developing a persona for example, it would be difficult to define the focuses of our mind map, and consequently, narrow our boundaries for analysis of problem areas. Additionally, we noticed that it was critical that we went beyond even primary levels, but to develop the secondary and tertiary levels of the mind map to enable us to consider our design in more specific contexts. This portion of the project brought some clarity to the persona development step. We first focused only on demographic factors, but soon understood the value pondering aspects like motivations, frustrations, and goals as they allowed us to bridge the gap to identifying problem areas, solution goals, and ultimately the problem statement. All in all, the group is progressing the project in a cooperative and effective manner, encouraging open communication and dividing duties according to our strengths. We are now narrowing in on specific solutions to specific problems (e.g. the issue of “bottom-bracing” in lifting, stirring, opening, and other kitchen activities. Furthermore, we have been able to make connections to some areas in course material, such as the imperativeness of concentrating on the function and usability of the products. In the future, we are looking forward towards narrowing down our problems into specific solutions and being able to prototype this into a tangible item.