UI Labeling things for age at a glance - user-interface

I have a web app for booking entertainers. I would like to see at a glance how long it's been since I booked them. Currently, I'm using colored labels.
performers booked in the future : green
performers booked recently :light blue
performers booked long ago : dark blue
performers booked never : black
Is there a typical way to label things that might be better than this? It's kinda weird. When I distribute this app, I want it to be immediately clear to the users that they are seeing a visual representation of how long ago the performer was booked.

I find there is a lot competing for the attention of the user, so maybe you can reduce the overall visual weight a bit.
Some things I'd look into:
sorting the list according to the booking date
grouping the list
reducing the amount of different booking states to 2 or 3
replace the tags by two different display styles: relevant to the user take up more space (future and recently booked) while the rest gets a collapsed view
Generally speaking it's better to improve a UI by leaving stuff out instead of adding more styles to fix a broken UI. What you choose depends on the priority of your use cases.
Not directly related to your question, the available button, the gray category tags and the bright booking tag are nearly unledgible due to a lack of contrast.
All the best with your app :)

While I agree with previous poster that there is overall a lot of competition, I wanted to give you an idea for your question about the dates and labels:
Overall, using colored labels, you’ll have four different colour blocks competing —> tag, Edit, Availability, and this new Booking Status one. So instead, you could consider using an icon with your text instead and thereby do away with the colour.
I use FontAwesome codes (https://fontawesome.com/cheatsheet?from=io) below for simplicity, but most icon sets should have a comparable one.
Future: [fa-calendar-plus] in 1 month
Recent: [fa-check-square] or [fa-clock] 2 days ago
Past: [fa-calendar-check] 02/2018
Performers Booked Never doesn’t need a label, since it’s the only exception and doesn't involve any form of booking.
On a side note:
- Perhaps consider reducing the number of hearts / blocks you have on each line, or using one heart with varying fills perhaps. I think it might be your primary culprit for the “clutter”.

Related

Optimizely reliability

We started using Optimizely and we're blown by the results so we started creating aggressive campaigns.
But then we realized something was wrong and I would appreciate any help we can get.
We tested (for example) on the homepage instead of a blue CTA, we created a variation with a green CTA and we saw a 35% increase in conversions with the variation. So then we switched things and set the green CTA as the control and the blue CTA as the variation. If it was really true that the green CTA is better we should now be seeing a 35% decrease in conversions with the variation of the blue CTA.
Instead, the variation came back with a higher conversion rate.
I can't pinpoint what we're doing wrong, but in general all the variations come in with a higher success rate than the control, but if we switch things around and set the variation as the control, the results don't switch.
How do you measure conversions? It's usually a good practice to measure in more ways than once - for example, for a CTA experiment I would measure clicks, landing on the page where the link redirects, valid form submissions etc. Expanding your view on the data and see how a change will affect other parts of the user experience is always a good idea.
Try:
On Results page apply different segments to identify improvement in each variation
I recommend setting a 90% of statistical significance
If you tested in 2 separate test, maybe you didnt let it the right time i usually prefer to have them by a week to avoid seasonality,
Are you making these adjustments to an experiment that has already been running? You should keep in mind that users are bucketed once you've started an experiment so making adjustments like switching who belongs to a control or not, after or whilst an experiment has run will not be starting you fresh so to say. If you're making the adjustments you describe then you'll need to create a new experiment.

How to continually filter interesting data to the user?

Take an example of a question/answer site with a 'browse' slideshow that will show one question/answer page at a time. The user clicks the 'next' button and a new question/answer is presented to him.
I need to decide which pages should be returned each time the user clicks 'next'. Some things I don't want and reasons why:
Showing 'newest' questions in descending order:
Say 100 questions get entered, then no user is going to click thru to the 100th item and it'll never get any responses. It also means if no new questions were asked recently, every time the user visits the site, he'll see the same repeated stale data.
Showing 'most active' questions, judged by a lot of suggested answers/comments:
This won't return those questions that have low activity, which are exactly the ones that need more visibility
Showing 'low activity' questions, judged by not a lot of answers/comments:
Once a question starts getting activity, it'll stop being shown. This will stymie the activity on a question, when I'd really like to encourage discussion.
I feel that a mix of these would work well, but I'm unsure of how to judge which pages should be returned. I'll stress that I don't want the user to have to choose which category of items to view (like how SO has the unanswered/active/newest filters).
Are there any common practices for doing this, or any ideas for how it might be done?
Thanks!
Edit:
Here's what I'm leaning towards so far, with much thanks to Tim's comment:
So far I'm thinking of ranking pages by Activity Count / View Count, where activity is incremented each time a user performs an action on a page, like a vote, comment, answer, etc. View will get incremented for each page every time a person views the page.
I'll then rank all pages by their activity/view ratio and show pages with a high ratio more often. This way pages with low activity and high views will be shown the least, while ones with high activity and low views will be shown most frequently. Low activity/low views and high activity/high views will be somewhere in the middle I imagine, but I'll have to keep a close eye on this in the beta release. I also plan on storing which pages the user has viewed in the past 24 hours so they won't see any repeats in the slideshow in a given day.
Some ideas for preventing 'stale' data (if all the above doesn't seem to prevent it): Perhaps run a cron job which will periodically check for pages that haven't been viewed recently and boost their ratio to put them at the top.
As I see it, you are touching upon two interesting questions:
How to define that a post is interesting to a user: Here you could take a weighted combination of various factors that could contribute to interestingness of a post. Amount of activity, how fresh the entry is, if you have a way of knowing that the item matches users interest etc etc. You could pick the weights based on intuition and see how well the result matches your expectation. If you have the time and inclination, you could collect data on how well your users respond to the entries and try to learn the optimum weights for each factor using machine learning techniques.
How to give new posts a chance, otherwise known as exploration-exploitation tradeoff.
BAsically, if you just keep going to known interesting entries then you will maximize instantaneous user happiness, but you will never learn about new interesting stuff hence, overall your users are unhappy.
This is a very well studies problem, and depending upon how much you want to get into it, you can read up literature on things like k-armed bandit problems.
But a simple solution would be to not pick the entry with the highest score, but pick the entry based on a probability distribution such that high score entries have higher probability of showing up. This way most of the times you show interesting stuff, but every post has a chance to show up occasionally.

Building an activity chart combining two kinds of data

I'm building, for example, an application that monitors your health. Each day, you're jogging and doing push-ups and you enter the information on a web site.
What I would like to do is building a chart combining the hours you jogged and the number of push-ups/sit-ups you did. Let's say on the first day, you jogged 1 hour and did 10 push-ups and on the second day, you jogged 50 minutes and did 20 push-ups, you would see a progression in your training.
I know it may sound strange but I want to have an overall-view of your health, not different views for jogging and push-ups. I don't want a double y-axis chart because if I have, as example, 6 runners, I will end up with 12 lines on the chart.
First I would redefine your terms. You are not tracking "health" here, you are tracking level of exertion through exercise.
Max Exertion != Max Health. If you exert yourself to the max and don't eat or drink, you will actually damage your health. :-)
To combine and plot your total "level of exertion" for multiple exercises you need to convert them to a common unit ... something like "calories burned".
I'm pretty sure there are many sources for reference tables with rough conversion factors for how many calories various exercises burn.
Does that help any?
Then you need a model of how push-ups and jogging affect yourself, and for this you should be asking a doctor or fitness expert, not a programmer :-). This question should probably be taken elsewhere.
Sounds like a double y-axis chart.
You can just do a regular excel-type chart with 2 lines, scaled appropriately, one for push-ups, one for jogging time. There are graphics libraries that let you do that in back-end language of your choice. X-axys is date.
You may want to have 2 scaled graphs, one for last week and one for last year (ala Yahoo Finance charts for different intervals).
Show the first set of values as a line graph above the x axis, and the second set below the x axis. If both sets of values increase over time this will show as an "expansion" of the graph; should be easy to recognize if one set is growing but the other is not.
Because the two quantities have no intrinsic relationship, you're stuck with either displaying them independently, such as two curves with two y-axes, or making up a measure that combines them, such as an estimate of calories burned, muscles used, mental anguish from exercising, etc. But it's tricky... taking from your example, I suspect one will never approach the calories burned from a 50 mile run by doing push-ups. Combining these in a meaningful way depends not on mathematics but on approximations and knowledge of the quantities that you start with and are interested in.
One compromise might be a graph with a single y-axis that shows some combined quantity, but where the independent values at each point are also graphically represented, for example, by a line where the local color represents the ratio of miles to pushups, or any of the many variants that display information in the shapes or colors in the plot.
Another option is to do a 3D plot, and then rotate it around and look for trends or whatever interests you.
If you want one overall measure of exercise levels, you could try using total exercise time. Another alternative is to define a points system, whereby users score points for each exercise.
I do think that there is virtue in letting the users see how much of each individual exercise they have done - in this case use a different graph for different exercises rather than using dual y-axes, if the scales are not comparable (e.g. time jogging and number of push-ups). There is a very good article on the problems with dual y-axes by business intelligence guru Stephen Few, here (pdf).
If you want to know more about presenting data well, I can also recommend his book "Now you see it", and the classic "The Visual Display of Quantitative Information" by Edward Tufte.

POS UI design & development: what should be included & avoided? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm having to design & develop UI for a Point of Sale (POS) system.
There are obvious features that need to be included, like product selection & quantity, payment method, tender amount, user login (as many users will use one terminal), etc.
My question is related more towards the UI design aspect of developing this system.
How should UI features/controls be positioned, sized?
Is there a preferred layout?
Are their colours I should be avoiding?
If you know of any resources to guide me, that would also help.
The reason this is critical to me as I am aware of the pressurized environment in which POS systems are used & I want to make the process as (i) quick, (ii) simple to use and (iii) result driven as possible for the user to service customers.
All answers, info & suggestions welcome.
Thanks.
P.s. If you could mention the "playoff" between controls that would also be appreciated (i.e. if touch screen a keypad control is provided, but if also supporting keyboard & mouse input how do you manage the keypad & UI space effectively?)
A couple of thoughts from a couple of projects I've worked with:
For the touch screen ensure that each button can be pressed by someone with "fat fingers" as easily as smaller ones (some layouts encourage the use of thumbs at particular locations). Also highlight each button when it is pressed (with a slow-ish fade if you have spare CPU cycles).
Bigger grids are better than smaller ones. The numeric pad should always be in the same place (often the bottom right). The Enter/Tender/etc. "transaction" keys should be bigger than the individual numeric keys - (1) make it more obvious where it is, (2) it will be pressed more often than other screen areas and will wear out (a bigger area will last longer on average; this was more important with older style touch screens; newer technology is more resilient).
Allow functions/SKUs to be reassigned to different grid positions; the layout that works well for one store will likely be wrong for a slightly different one.
Group related functions by colour, but use excellent contrasts. Make sure that the fore/back combination looks good at all angles (some LCDs "bleed" colours left-to-right and/or top-to-bottom angles).
Positive touch screen feedback with sounds needs to have configurable volume and sound sets. Muted tones might be better in an quieter upmarket store, but "perky" sounds are better in a clothing store with louder background music/noise, etc.
Allow the grid size to be specified in percentages or "grid-block units" instead of pixels and draw everything with vectors, etc. since some hardware combinations may have LCDs with better resolution. (One system I worked on was originally specified as 640x480 but shipped at 1280x1024, so my design pre-planning saved a lot of rework later.)
And of course look at the ready-made solutions first (especially if you can get demo software/hardware for evaluation). Although they can be expensive they've often implemented a lot of things that'll you'll have to work through later, and may be cheaper in the long run, even after creating custom add-ons for your system.
Also:
Our UI supported a normal keyboard/mouse combo too (the touchable buttons were just standard button controls sized appropriately). If you pressed a number key it would trigger the same event as clicking the screen-pad button; other hotkeys were mapped to often used button commands (Enter, etc).
If run on a non-POS desktop (e.g. backoffice) the window could be resized too (the "POS desktop" maintained the same aspect ratio, adding dead space at the sides if needed). A standard top menu was available for additional administrative tasks, reporting, etc.
The design allowed everyone to build and test the UI before the associated hardware was finalized. And standard UI testing tools would work too.
Even More:
Our barcode scanners were serial/USB rather than keyboard-like, so each packet from the device raised a comms event. The selected "scanner type" driver class used the most secure formatting that the device could give us - some can supply prefix, suffix and/or checksum characters if programmed correctly - and then stripped this before handing the code up to the application.
The system made a "bzzzt" noise when the barcode couldn't be used (e.g. while cash drawer is open).
This design also avoided the need to set the keyboard focus to a specific entry area.
A tip: if the user is manually entering a barcode via the keypad, and hasn't completed it by pressing Enter, and then attempts to scan another barcode, it should beep instead, so the user can accept or cancel the pending item first.
Aggregated POS Design Guidelines
Based on the above and other literature, here is my list of guidelines for POS design.
[it would be nice if we grew this list further]
User Performance Priorities (in order):
efficiency (least time to transaction conclusion)
effectiveness (accurate info & output)
user satisfaction (based on first 2 in work context)
learning time (reduce time to learn system by making it simple)
GUIDELINES
Flexible Transaction Building - don't force a sequence to transaction wher possible. Place product orders in any order & allow them to be changed to a point.
Optimise Transaction Rate - allow a user to complete a transaction as quickly as possible (least clicks are not really the issue as more clicks could mean larger value of transaction, which makes business sense)
Support Handedness / Dexterity - most users have a dominant hand and a weaker hand in terms of dexterity. Allow the UI to be customised (on a single click) for handedness. my example: a L->R / R->L toggle button which moves easy features like "OK", "Cancel" in nearer proximity to weaker hand.
Constant Feedback - provide snapshot feedback which describes current state of the transaction and calculated result of transaction (NB: accounts) before & after committing a transaction.
Control "Volume" - control volume refers to the colour saturation/contrast, prominence of positioning and size of a control. Design more frequently used controls to have larger "volumes" relative to less frequently used controls. e.g. "Pay" button larger than "cancel" button. E.g. High contrast & greater colour saturation increase volume.
Target Findability - finding & selecting targets (item, numeric key) is key to efficiency. Group related controls (close proximity), place controls on screen edges (screen edge traps pointer), emphasise control amplitude (this dimension emphasises users normal plain of motion) and colour coding make finding & selecting targets more efficient.
Avoid Clutter - too many options limits control volume and reduces findability.
Use Plain Text - avoid abbreviations as much as possible (only use standard abbreviations e.g. size: S, M, L, etc.). This is especially true for product lookup.
Product Lookup - support shortcuts for regular orders (i.e. burger meal), categorised browsing & item name search (least ordered items). Consider include a special item: this is any item where the user types what is wanted (i.e. specific whiskey order) - this requires pricing though.
Avoid User Burden - the user should be able to read answers to customer questions from the UI. So provide regularly requested/prioritised feedback for transaction (i.e. customer asks: "what will be the the outstanding balance on my account if I buy this item?" It should appear in UI already)
Conversational Ordering - customer drives the ordering not the system. So allows item selection to be non-sequential.
Objective Focused - the purpose of POS is to conclude the transaction from a business perspective. Always make transaction conclusion possible immediately with "Pay" button. If clicked, any incomplete items will be un-done: user then read order back before requesting cash/credit card)
Personas - there are different categories (personas) of users of POS systems like (i) Clerk/Cashier and (ii) Manager. The UI should present the relevant options to that logged-in persona according to these guidelines i.e. Cashier: large volume on transaction building controls; Manager: large volume on transaction/user management controls.
Touch Screens - (i) allow for touch input with generally larger controls to supported a large finger tip as pointer. (ii) Provide proprioceptive feedback - this is feedback that indicate the control pushed (it should have a short delay on it fade: user finger will be in the way initially). (iii) Auditory Feedback (optional) - this helps with feedback especially with regards errors in pressurised environment.
User Training - users must be trained to understand business protocol & how the POS supports that protocol. They are the one's driving the system. Also, speak to POS users to design & enhance your system - again they are experienced users of the POS system
Context Analysis - a thorough analysis of the context of use for your POS system should be performed to best implement the POS heuristics mentioned above effectively. Understanding the user (human factors), the tasks (frequency, duration, stress factors, etc.) and environment (lighting, hardware, space layout, etc.) should be comprehensively conducted during design and should not be assumed. Get your hands dirty & get into the users work space!! That way you can develop something your specific users can use effectively, efficiently and satisfactorily
I hope this helps everyone.
To all respondents, I really appreciate your feedback! Please give me more wrt to this answer. Thanks
I ran across this question, and I thought I'd add my two cents since some of my work has been mentioned here.
I agree with most of what's been said, but it's important to remember that most everything mentioned represents heuristics. That means that while they're good principles to follow, there are likely times when (a) specific rules should be broken, and (b) there will be contradictions between rules. The trick is being able to weigh conflicting principles and apply them to the appropriate degrees (as you noted in a previous comment).
In the end, it's a matter of balancing the business requirements and user needs in a way that produces optimal results. And in the real world, I find that this can never be achieved through heuristics alone.
Here's an example: I recently finished POS designs for Subway, Wendy's, and Starbucks (see Case Studies at POSDesigns.com). All of these designs used solid heuristics, but all of them came out very, very different because of differences in the business goals and requirements, the users' needs and background, the environment in which they work, the technology being used, and a whole host of other differences.
You can never create a great design in a vacuum. For each of the clients mentioned above, I traveled around to a lot of different types of stores in multiple countries to get a feel for how the users' worked, how the systems would be used, how customers ordered, etc. All this information - along with sales and other data provided by the company - was invaluable in creating a highly usable solution.
Here's another example: Guideline #3 you provide previously ("Support Handedness / Dexterity") is fine as a heuristic (though I have to say that I question the conclusion of swapping simply OK/Cancel). But in visiting Subway stores, we discovered that in that context, the location of the register actually plays a greater role in the hand employees prefer.
In other words, registers that were squished against a wall on the right side tended to produce left-handed users, even when the users were right-handed for every other task. This had implications for the way we allowed the UI to be flip-flopped...and who had control of it. There are tons of examples like that, but we never could have achieved the gains that the user interfaces have produced - like 90% reduction in voids, near zero training, increased speed, accuracy, and check sizes, etc. - by following heuristics alone.
One more point (sorry...you've got me going now :-). Many times heuristics are incomplete without more data as to how to apply them. Consider your guideline #11, "Conversational Ordering". There's much more to this guideline than just providing flexibility in order entry. For instance, one of the many things you have to consider is that not all paths should be presented as equally probable.
We analyzed the way Starbucks' customers ordered in various locations across the United States and United Kingdom. Then, we optimized the system for the most commonly spoken patterns. If we had allowed all paths to have the same "volume", we would have sacrificed usability in other areas, since the design would have appeared more cluttered. The new POS system now supports almost all possible order patterns, but the most probable paths are presented at a higher "volume" than those that are less probable.
OK, it turned out to be more than two cents, but the bottom line is this: If you have a chance to visit the environments in which your POS will be used, analyze customer/employee interactions, etc. ...you should take it. Contextual observations and analysis are invaluable in correctly applying heuristics to your situation.
Good luck!
Dr. Kevin Scoresby
FYI - I'd enjoy talking further about this if you or anyone else in the group would like. My office phone number is on my "About Us" page at POSDesigns.com, or you can use the form to initiate an email conversation. Feel free to call anytime during business hours U.S., East Coast Time.
Devstuff already provides some great answers. In addition:
Create a prototype design (can be simply color-printed on paper) and test this in a scenario that is as realistic as possible, i.e. in a store, with a real future user. Enact a few common scenarios and ask the user to really 'use' your prototype as he / she would use the final product. Obtain feedback through interview and observation.
One way to evaluate your design is to check if you have applied the CRAP principles of design. This article discusses how this can relate to user interface design.
In addition to what has already been posted, here are some tips we picked up along the way.
We use two distinct UI's, one for touch-screen with large bold buttons and one for mouse/keyboard entry. the code behind them is the same just the layout is different.
For touch screens
Try not to have pop-up messages that take focus away from the main form, as users may not be looking at the screen, for example if they are chatting with the customer. we found that if this happen users will continues scanning products unaware that they are not been entered into the sale.
If using a bar code scanner be aware that they sometimes send an enter key after the bar code, that will active focused controls (saying yes/no to pop-ups). To help prevent this we disable the enter key-press on buttons, so only a mouse/finger press will fire the click event. we also turn tab stop to false (may be called different in you language), to stop controls that are touch only from getting focus.
As far as colours go we try to stick to bold button and font colours that can easily be distinguished/read in poorly lit rooms and on screens with glare, as most times users are not in the position to move the screen should they have problem reading it.
Anything you can do to speed up/ help the user is a good thing, for example on our payment screen, as well as having 0..9 keys for payment entry, we also have £1,£2,£5,£10 etc so users don't have to add up the money they are given, they can just press the key for each coin/note they received from the customer.
The best tip I can give is to remember that you are designing for a completely different environment form a desktop application, that would be used in an office. and that users may of never used a computer before. since POS systems are usually locked down, try to make it as easy to use out of the box as possible.
another thing to consider is personas (as introduced in cooper's "the inmates are running the asylum").
essentially, you make up a few canonical "users". give them names, hobbies, skills, a picture, and use them as the people you are designing for.
ie:
billy the cashier: has some computer experience (playing on his ps2). he's in high school, may go to community college. he's a primary user of the system, and wants to be able to learn the new system quickly.
cyrus the manager: needs to manage the cashiers. needs a way, with only his authorization, void transactions and be able to review logs of the sales for making reports as well as managing "shrinkage" (theft). he has 2 kids, lives out in the suburbs so has a 45 minute commute; therefore he doesn't want to spend extra time wrangling the system.
you may need three or four personas; any more than that and it becomes hard to design for.
I highly recommend the book "inmates are running the asylum", plus cooper wrote another book: "about face"; which I have yet to read.
good luck!
I would recommend doing some sort of usability survey amongst your current user group. There is no need for this to be a complicated or highly scientific survey. Present them with simple questions to determine:
The users priority when using the system (accuracy of task, speed, aesthetics)
Preferred input devices
Work flow through such a system
Level of education and domain knowledge
I have found that a lot can be learnt from a simple survey like this and can be applied to your UI design to ensure that the users usability experience is satisfactory.
Great comments from everyone else. I'll just add that there's also an article by Dr. Kevin Scoresby titled "How to Design a (POS) System that Everybody Hates" that discusses usability of POS systems and adds a few points to what people have already mentioned, such as:
Don't punish the employee for customer choices
Avoid creating conflicts with the real world
Avoid color coding (1 out of 10 males has a form of color blindness)
I've also discovered lots of helpful POS design tips at POSDesigns.com. One thing I found interesting is that by focusing too much on the number of button presses, you can actually impact speed--which is often a primary goal. There's also a tip titled "Five Factors that Influence Speed" that I found helpful.
Good luck!
Kyle
There are already some really good systems out there i.e. Tabtill for Win 8 http://www.tabtill.com or Shopkeep for iOS http://www.shopkeep.com. The fewest number of clicks your user need to do the better. As I am also involved in coding for such solutions and having worked with clients using various POS systems, some can be really frustrating. Remember watching cashiers in a bar tapping 10 times just to take payment for a couple of items, their fingers are hopelessly hovering over the screen trying to find the right colourful button. Keep it simple! Allow sorting of your visible product range, categorize them or use barcode reader. Keep at least 5% gap between buttons and don't let silly animations slow down your UI. Either invent your own or just copy what is already out there with your own twist.

Removing shipped items from cumulative flow diagrams

I've just implemented kanban on my team and have started tracking the
states of items across time. We've come to the point we we're about to
ship our first release under this system, and I've got a question
about what to do with finished work items.
We have a state "completed" that represents a work item that has been
customer accepted and is ready to ship. The idea is to remove items
completely from the board as they are shipped, or as they are
considered to be "done done" (for things like infrastructure tasks,
etc.). However, if we remove items from complete, the CFD takes a big
dip down (for instance, we have 11 completed items right now, compared
to 14 items in "active" states, e.g. not backlog). I'm okay with doing
this, as it quite clearly shows when releases happen, but I haven't
seen any published CFDs that do this. Every CFD that I've seen seems
to trend upwards forever.
Is there any sort of consensus or "best practice" (with all the
caveats that that term implies) that speaks for or against removing
items from the CFD? It's worth noting that I am tracking shipped /
closed items, for purposes of engineering and end-to-end cycle time,
but those metrics are being tracked separately.
Wow, not a lot of Kanban action around here :)
After some discussion on this topic on the kanbandev mailing list, I've decided to go ahead and track these. I've changed my previous "Completed" stage to be "Ready to Ship" (still contained on my board), and created a new state called "Shipped / Closed". Shipped / Closed isn't on the board, but I keep track of it in a separate spreadsheet (where I'm keeping track of other things like lead time, etc.).
What you could do is use a release ID as a separate field for filtering already-shipped items out of your CFD. If you're really running kanban, then you have WIP continually, at different stages of the workflow, and so you don't want to lose the status of current items. You should see the entire chart 'shift down' at a release as the released items drop off the chart, but this should also give you some continuity on in-progress items.
You might also want to save a snapshot of the CFD before the release drops out of scope, in order to look at the deltas between state changes for items through the workflow, so you can see how the deltas compare for the current release. Increased deltas, shown by greater horizontal distances between the various workflow stages in the CFD at a given time, indicate a workflow constraint that you should look at; teams can't get better forever, but they shouldn't be getting worse.

Resources