Problem
In the absence of a structured framework and internal alignment, the product owner relied on MS Forms to gather data from the internal team for onboarding new tenants. This cumbersome process took a week to complete and required extensive mediation from administrative staff and developers. Consequently, many internal team members refrained from using the platform.
Further, there were more challenges
The project was managed by lean engineering teams using solutions already available
Internal alignment was challenging due to differing opinions within the engineering team
The department was newly established and lacked a design culture
The lack of a central design system led to inconsistencies across design elements
No formal UX process was being practiced and I had to adhere to sprint timelines while managing sprint deliverables
Research Methods
Data gathered from combined user interviews, competitor analysis and surveys revealed following insights.
Desk Research
Stakeholder Interviews
Internal Alignment Workshop
Competitor Analysis
Interview with users - Remote Contextual Inquiry
Usability testing on competitors site
Design Process
As a newcomer to the team and a novice in this technical domain, I faced considerable challenges grasping the fundamental concepts of authorization models.My journey included exploring how other companies leverage AI to enhance user experiences, with the goal of integrating similar advancements into our products.To deepen my understanding, I conducted multiple rounds of stakeholder interviews with our product owner, technical architect, and the global director of cross-platform teams.These discussions were crucial in helping me appreciate their vision, business objectives, and KPIs.Below is a concise overview of my design process, which involved iterative design and stakeholder mapping.
.png)
Solution - Iteration 1 - Personalization strategy
The onboarding experience at this stage involved implementing a personalization strategy to onboard new users. This strategy included determining access based on roles and user intent. Once these factors were identified, we guided the user through the setup process.
.png)
Usability Finding
The usability findings revealed that, while we successfully gauged user intent, we failed to effectively communicate the value proposition of our product. This issue arose from the challenge of mapping users' mental models of the RBAC concept into an easy-to-use visualization, which would illustrate how we designed the RBAC.
Ideation 2 - Adding Hints and Cues
Based on our initial usability findings, we aimed to communicate the value of our system to technical users who were already familiar with the RBAC model. We needed to illustrate how the RBAC model was mapped in our system. To achieve this, we used visualization cues, examples, and code snippets, demonstrating that our application supported all the functionalities they were accustomed to.
Usability Finding
In the next round of usability testing, we observed increased user confidence as they could see what we had built. However, after the initial setup, users still lacked confidence in using the product and did not experience their first "AHA" moment.
Final Solution
After the second round of usability testing, it became clear that building familiarity and trust was crucial. To address this, we provided users with tasks for data validation, giving them a taste of the model we developed. This approach resulted in higher activation rates and significantly increased engagement with the product.
Outcome and Impact
The product activation rate improved from 10% to 30% after the 3rd solutions.
The user onboarding time reduced to less than one hour from a week's time
The NPS and CSAT score were also very positive and the internal team said they would recommend this to other teams as well.