I chose to triangulate with three methods because no single approach alone provides comprehensive insights. I began with usability testing to pinpoint design issues and understand the reasons behind them. Quantitative analytics quantified frequency, while qualitative interviews delved into user motivations and journey context.

Application Analytics

Problem: Only 9% submit an application, and just 5% get accepted.

To understand the magnitude of the problem, I conducted a detailed analysis of application analytics. Over a one-month period, I examined 21 applications.

I identified that users struggled particularly with financial jargon heavy questions, such as gross receipts.

This analysis allowed me to pinpoint where users faced challenges and what steps in the process needed improvement.

Usability Testing

Problem: 60% of users find the application confusing and unhelpful.

I tested the existing application with 5 BIPOC business owners remotely via Zoom. My goal was to evaluate the current design and understand the "why" behind the drop-off rate.

During the tests, users expressed confusion over specific instructions. They struggled with understanding terms like "gross receipts" and what documents were needed. Instructions were not user-friendly and not findable during the application. This confusion contributed significantly to the high drop-off rate.

By evaluating the existing design, I could see that users were frustrated and confused by the lack of clear guidance. These insights highlight the critical issues in the current application process, underscoring the need to address these pain points.

User Interviews

67% of Users Confused by Eligibility Criteria

I conducted interviews with 6 BIPOC business owners remotely via Zoom. I aimed to understand how and where users finished their applications. I wanted to see if they got stuck, and if so, how they got unstuck.

I found users began confused and initially didn't jump right in because they felt overwhelmed. Users found it difficult to determine eligibility with the existing design.

Personas

2 Distinct Personas Emerged from the Research.

I found two personas during research: the Principle Pathfinder (someone who owns the business) and the Strategic Liaison (someone who helps the owner apply). These interviews helped my team understand user needs, such as what kind of device they use.

The personas illustrated that these users were high school graduates with limited college and business knowledge, and they needed help getting started.

Journey Mapping

All Users Initially Rejected; 83% Sought Help from Office Hours

I wanted to understand the full user journey for certification. My goal was to see where we could cut out steps or promote resources.

Journey maps aligned the team and revealed that promoting programs like office hours is key to helping more users get certified.

Potential solutions must address the following factors to avoid user drop-off:

1. Users are unsure about their eligibility and need a clear method to verify.

2. Users abandoned the application due to overwhelming business jargon.

3. Promote service programs to get user to improve application conversions

4. Help users understand the bidding process.

Mapping Workshop via UXPressia Aligned Team on Problems and Solutions

I facilitated a mapping exercise with UX designers and other stakeholders related to our certification application.

My goal was to get everyone aligned with the journey map. I feared that doing the mapping alone would not engage others, and the map would just become "wallpaper."

Fishbone Mapping

Team Alignment Through Fishbone Diagram

I facilitated a fishbone mapping workshop to unify the team and align stakeholders. This functioned as a northstar, guiding us throughout the design process.

The fishbone diagram helped identify key problems and their causes. It ensured everyone was on the same page.

This workshop fostered collaboration and clarity. The diagram was essential for team alignment.