Main Challenge
Solving a key user trust issue: Some Nexoya users did not feel confident enough about the validity of the platform's AI-powered predictions, a key product selling point.
What's Nexoya?
Solution
I led a feature redesign initiative to improve clarity when it comes to how users understand the AI-powered predictions. A highly iterative and collaborative design process, resulting in a new prominent "Validation" 2nd-level tab.
See before/after design solution
Impact
CLIENT
MY ROLE
Lead UX/UI Designer | UX Writer
PROJECT TIMEFRAME
ca. 3 Months
TEAM
CEO, Head of Product, Head of CSM, Head of ML, Developers (2)
TOOLS USED (2)
Figma, Notion
AFFECTED LANGUAGES (1)
🇺🇸 English (American English)
Define
Define the problem. What needs to be solved, and how do we do it?
Previous design to be redone below (Demonstrated with old Figma screens) 👇
Main user friction point below: What is gain/loss? What do these figures mean?
Myself, the Head of Product and Head of Machine Learning (ML) came together, and identified 3 key themes of the "What" to focus on throughout the design process. They are:
The answer is simple: They directly address specific user painpoints as discovered from the research phase of the problem definition stage.
These themes act as a base for the phases of the design. By directly addressing user needs, we address key issues that affect business value, with a strong focus on leveraging user trust.
2.1: Ideate: Phase 1
Conceptualise: Bring ideas to life.
This design phase is largely conceptual.
It involves starting the design momentum and working towards something "less wrong" per iteration.
While it's unlikely these will be used in their purest form, it does provide a clear insight into what works, and what doesn't.
And why?
Creating a new 2nd level category is a simple way in "Adding" to the product feel, without modifying any existing features which could potentially throw existing users off.
Moreover, an additional 2nd level category creates a new, experimentation-friendly canvas.
From this, we could create 3rd-level categories, directly attacking the key themes of Data Transparency, AI-Validity and Subscription Value.
They are as follows:
Issue:
Show the value users are getting by subscribing.
This architecture shows in which categories the solutions are placed.
2.2 Ideate: Phase2
Discuss and review with the team: Review and improve.
The mid-fi prototype had been created to get the ball rolling - it was time to discuss and review with key stakeholders, notably Head-of-Product, Head-of-CSM and the Head-of-ML.
The design ticked the key boxes for Data Transparency, AI-Validity and Subscription Value - it was a good job so far.
However - there was some pushback in terms of the UI layout, particularly in a SaaS analytics industry context.
Basically, the Card-based UI hierarchy layout was an issue.
Why?
For context: Nexoya users are well acquainted with tools such as Google Analytics and DV360. Navigation hierarchies are small, functional in nature, drawing more attention to the analytics charts and tables in the content area. This made sense in the context of user centred design.
V2
3: Refine
Cut out the noise: Iterate and focus on the smaller details.
To continue the collaborative design approach, the key stakeholders and I sat down to refine the feature further. Due to the highly specialised performance-marketing based profile of Nexoya's target audience, collaboration with the CSM department was key.
After speaking and conducting unmoderated tests with clients and in-house Nexoya users, the CSM team played an invaluable role in providing specific user insights, including quick, easily executable product improvements.
The insights include specific SaaS and performance marketing industry knowledge, proving highly valuable in keeping the feature user-focussed.
To summarise, we focussed on:
This prototype shows all key refinement changes above, together in one place.
Prototype
Prototype and test. Does the solution add value?
Refine as needed
Incorporate user feedback into the design solution
The original "Overview" category was to be renamed "Performance", and the previous "Performance" category to be reimagined and renamed as "Validation".
By doing this, we addressed the usability issues head on: Some users found the overview page too content dense. Moreover, it was clear that two user tasks couldn't be combined at once: 1) Assessing portfolio performance and 2) validating AI-predictions.
Therefore, validating AI-predictions required its own distinct category to mirror this user need.
Deliver
Final check: Rollout and hand-over design solution to dev. team