Goal

Apple announced that effective January 2021, if an app allows a user to create an account, it must also allow that user to delete their account from within the app itself. We wanted to make it easy for the users to redeem offers in-store shopping by giving users the ability to delete their accounts while encouraging them to continue buying.

Process

I started by researching and assessing this feature and how others tackle it. Next, I followed by generating ideas through brainstorming and sketching to develop an user experience flow and a set of on-brand illustrations.

Then, since the functionality is shared with other CTC apps, we split the research between teams. To evaluate the IA and determine how people categorize and label the items on the account page and find the best place to add account deletion, I ran one closed card sorting test with a few participants. In conjunction with nine usability tests run by the CTC App designer.

Report Summary

• 90% of users placed ‘deletion“ under settings, and defined app settings as managing all aspects of the app.
• 88% participants asked for more clarification on the “Rewards and Canadian Tire” page, some were unable to figure out or guess what the page meant, some of the comments we heard: "What’s Triangle ID?"
• One participant who didn’t ask for more clarification took a long time to answer, but ultimately understood it.

To address user’s concerns, the content team re-worked the microcopy, whereas I created new illustrations that matched the look and feel of the brand and worked in tandem with the UX experience.

Solution

Goal

This case study is centred on revamping the app by implementing a filter with specific options for offers, such as filtering by multiplier, category and brand. While working on this task, we understood that our assumption could be superficial because other dynamics and triggers come to play that influence the user behaviour.

Problem

• Poor organizational design in a bewildering morass of contradiction and confuses the user: e.g. personalized offers and weekly flyers visually treated the same way despite of being two distinct things.
• Consistency issues: different filter design for weekly offers and swap offers
• Lack of feedback which clearly explains that there are no matching results or other specific conditions.
• No scrolling indicator, hence, user’s don’t realize they can scroll down to find more categories.
• Users want to filter by brands and rewards value.

As a next step, together with a Researcher, we elected the type of test plan - comparative research - to provide insights into user challenges and why they think a certain way. As, showing two different designs to each user and asking them questions about the differences between them would allow us to test the effectiveness and efficiency of the assets.

Exploration #1

On this version, "weekly flyers" & "personalized offers" have identical visual treatment and are in the same place on the layout (no change). Researched showed, participants couldn't understand the difference between the two and couldn’t identify that "Shop Now" cards were weekly deals. In addition, some participants were confused by the status filter "active/inactive".

Exploration #2

On this version, I swamped "activate" by "shop now" on the personalized offers. In addition, I removed the "shop now" from "weekly flyers" and "weekly flyers" were given a particular section and placed at the bottom. Research showed participants were able to identify that "shop now" cards were weekly deals. 78% of the participants said that personalized offers are more critical than flyers.

Exploration #3

In addition, weekly flyers were given a particular section and placed on top. Removed the “shop now” from weekly flyers, kept ”shop now” on the personalized offers. Participants successful activated offers, and tapped the card to view more details. Participants successfully filtered and cleared filters, participants referred to this version as more friendly, but preferred brands to come first.

Quotes from participants:

"Horizontal scroll is pretty clear, and you don't need to activate the offers."
"Having the small section for these deals is fine and it puts more emphasis on your personalized offers".

Discovery Results

• 80% participants experienced information overload.
• 78% found it necessary to filter through available personalized offers.
• Low comprehension around filtering, 92% of users took 43 — 50 seconds or over to filter an item.
• Participants have a great understanding of what's a "spend and get" and a "multiplier offer" but couldn't understand that any "shop now" section was a "weekly flyer" deal.
• 77% said personalized offers are more important than weekly flyer offers and preferred the weekly flyer offers to have their own section.

As part of the MPV approach, the product team delivered increments of value that are both minimal and viable releases. The first release is depicted in the video right above and the preferred solution in the screenshot section.

Solution

• Changed the dynamic of "activate/activated" and "shop now"
• Removed status from filter
• Utilized identical filter design for weekly offers and swap offers

Screenshots