Experience It Like A Local
Part 1 — Discover and Define
A UX case study on the mobile first design of a local experience booking service for ACE Hotels London. This is part 1 of 2 where I talk about the discover and define phases of this project.
This project was a 2-week sprint undertaken while attending a course at General Assembly London. Myself and 2 other junior UX designers worked to a provided brief based on real world company ACE Hotel. Following a double diamond process we aimed to design a service to enable both recreational and business travellers to find and book local experiences.
Challenge
People travel to collect stories and experiences. But the business minded and the recreational geared person go about it in 2 very different ways. There are also those who plan things down to a tee and those who act on a whim. How do you balance the needs of these two user groups? How do you design a flexible, trustworthy and efficient way of booking and rescheduling a local experience?
The Process
Discover
During the discovery phase, we used a variety of research tools to gain insight into the environment we were designing in. The first step was to conduct a contextual inquiry of ACE Hotels Shoreditch location. This was to better understand who they were as a brand and who their clientele was — our users. Through observation of the space and how people interacted inside it, we discovered the following.
The lobby functioned as a diverse space and included a cafe, restaurant, bar and gallery. The liveliest space though was the work/ meeting space that we learnt was busy most days when talking to staff. We also discovered that this space largely attracted young professionals (aged 25–35). While the older corporate guests (aged 35–50) staying at the hotel were mostly seen coming and going. So our user base was already showing two diverse groups.
There was also already a present and lively curation of experiences. Which included music, art, food and cultural talks happening within the hotel on a weekly basis. So there was already an existing visualisation of what comprised a local experience to ACE Hotels brand image. A boutique hotel experience currently with 10 locations — 9 in the Americas and 1 in London.
We accept the hotel as a potential for real, fluid community. We believe that hospitality is compassion, that it is not servility but genuine concern for others’ well-being and the ability to live with empathy.
- ACE Hotels mission statement
Through 5 conversations during our inquiry, we analysed how people currently went about locating and booking an experience. Looking for insights that would aid in further defining our problem space. Listening for commonalities in the thoughts and feelings of the users we talked to. Afterwards, observations were unpacked onto an empathy map, as a way of synthesising our notes and working together to identify user needs.
Some of the key findings were as follows.
- For the young professional and corporate guests alike quality of experience came before quantity. They both spoke about the importance of reviews or trusted recommendations in locating an experience.
- For both groups, details about the experience were key in building trust around it being worthwhile. Information like location and running time was sought out before proceeding to book.
- One area in which the two groups diverged was in locating the experience. While the young professionals were happy to spend time researching online and creating wish lists. The corporate guests wanted a recommendation for something that could fit into their already set itinerary.
To close out the discovery phase of our process we conducted a competitive analysis. Using heuristics to analyse the quality of 3 experiences currently offered. How they went about solving the problem. What they did well and what they struggled with. The services analysed included direct competitors Airbnb and Fever. As well as indirect competitor TimeOut London.
This analysis which you can see diagramed above led to the discovery of two focusable areas of improvement. The first was ‘findable’ or how easy it was for users to locate what they were looking for. From our previous conversations with users, we had learnt of the importance of location. With some users preferring to view search results on a map and others just wanting to know what is nearby. The second was ‘controllable’ or wether users were given flexibility to adapt the functionality to their context. We knew that location was important but equally so was reviews so our solution should address these changing needs.
I would now like to walk you through the task of locating an experience with Fever. This activity is used to objectively analyse Fever’s user experience. Giving specific concern to the quality of the two heuristic measures of findable and controllable.
- (2) Fever allows users to filter profile recommended results by specific areas of London as well as (1) ‘close to me’. Is this labelling unconventional though and would ‘nearby’ feel more natural for users?
- (3) It’s helpful that the chosen filter is confirmed for the user on the updated results page. Though the inability to sort results and the fact that (4) a result 8 miles away sits above another 3.1 miles away shows a lack of control that could leave users frustrated.
- On the experience details page, a map and address are provided at the bottom under (5) ‘available locations’. This labelling is useful for experiences available in multiple locations but in this case, causes confusion.
- With the address are (6) two blocks of colour which can be translated as underground train lines. It is a quick snippet of info that can be helpful to locals but does not take visitors into regard. Both the map and address may be interacted with to bring up a full-screen map. Notable is the lack of an icon to signify where the underground station is with the reuse of the coloured blocks.
- The (7) current location icon can be tapped to give a very helpful overview of your location compared to the destination. I was unsure of what (8) the two arrows signified at first, but the ability to get more specific directions from other well-known services is a plus. An option placing more control in the user’s hands and increasing the quality of the experience.
In summary, Fever looks to focus on users that are local to London. They forego giving users more control, opting to instead provide a small curated list of experiences. They don’t outwardly focus on spur of the moment experiences. Yet the lack of searching for specific dates and creating wish lists seems to favour that course of action.
It’s important to note here that of the 3, Fever is the only to require its users to download an app. This is reflected in the heuristic diagram from earlier with Fever being measured lowest in ‘accessible’. By not being available as a mobile website Fevers overall user experience is less robust. Having to download the app is a gateway for users looking for a spur of the moment recommendation.
Accessible also refers to how considerate the experience is to users with disabilities and how inclusive it is on the whole. Fever benefits from but also supports screen reader services built in by Apple and Android. They make good use of colour and adaptable typography provided by the system design guides to make content readable for users with vision impairments. I touch on this briefly because of its importance in following a design process that strives to meet best practices. Though also to make digital experiences more usable for everyone.
This same task of locating and booking an experience was conducted with the 2 remaining competitors. Most noteworthy for both is the lack of easily searching for experiences nearby. While you can use location based searches with both, neither instils the user with control. Airbnb’s search does not seem to effect which experiences are displayed. During analysis, we discovered the exact same experiences displayed for multiple location searches. Instead, results actually looked to be based on your current location. Though there was no confirmation provided by the website to confirm this was the case.
TimeOut London, on the other hand, has its biggest strength found in its global search. Searching for a specific location will give you a myriad of interesting experiences. Trying to filter those results down so they are more relevant to what you are looking for is where the issues start. In one scenario say you were looking to experience some English humour while visiting London. You search comedy and get a list of results. Next, you filter by location and enter Shoreditch (issue observed with confirming selections have been made). At this point, you have 2 results but both are little more than contact details and a link to a website for both venues. There is a single user review but it’s not incredibly helpful and refers to the venues music instead of comedy. you are forced in both cases to look for more details elsewhere. So while search may be TimeOut’s strength it is also its weakness. With such a high quantity of results, they struggle to maintain the quality of them all.
Define
Moving into the define phase we started by re-stating our earlier discovery of two diverse user groups. The young professionals and the corporate guests. With a new appreciation and understanding of the space we were designing in, the decision was made to narrow our focus. With the limited duration of this sprint and the desire to create as much value as possible in our solution. We pivoted to focus solely on the user group of corporate guests. It made sense in that we were designing a new service for a hotel and the people who are most important in that regard are the guests. There would still be value in our solution for more than just one group of people. Yet front and centre in our minds would be the journey and persona of our corporate guest.
Gathering our research efforts from the discover phase of our process we set about building the persona above. It allowed us to build greater empathy towards our user and put ourselves in their shoes when making future design decisions. Claire is a go getter with a strong work ethic but also the desire to make the most of her free time. Her biggest struggle is finding the time to plan and see what’s out there. More often than not it’s always easier to just not go out and she wants to avoid bad experiences as much as possible. Though she does feel like she is missing out when looking at her friends and colleagues amazing updates on Facebook.
To further understand how Claire went about locating and booking a local experience we mapped her user journey. Doing so we were able to deconstruct her experience as a series of steps and then analyse each step against useful themes. This activity deepened our understanding of what motivated/ or prohibited Claire from taking the next step in her journey. It also let us identify possible pain points which opened up opportunities to enhance the experience. The opportunities identified would serve as a springboard as we moved into the develop stage of our process the following day.
One key discovery during this activity was that the greatest moment of excitement for Claire was when she first arrived on the website. In this scenario, Claire is visiting on business and lacks the time between work and family to plan something. So she has just discovered this service upon checking into the hotel. It is our goal at this point to help inspire her to discover what she may want to do. Then to maintain this level of excitement throughout the journey.
A large challenge for myself and my fellow UX team members during this project which came into view as we looked for design opportunities. Is answering the question are our design ideas and direction good enough? Have we understood the problem? Is our solution meaningful and does it do something unique or more to push further and connect with our users?
Key to answering this was always being vigilant in referring back to our user research. If a new idea or opportunity came out of our competitive analysis or our user journey mapping we would ask, is their value in this for our user, for Claire? Doing so meant we were taking a user-centred approach that strove to push beyond just problem-solving. Also connecting with users on a deeper emotional level that aimed to create investment for the user in the experience.
With these opportunities identified we undertook a short retrospective to conclude the define phase of our process. The goal was to review our brief and make sure we were addressing both the clients needs and our users. To reiterate we had the overarching goal of designing for mobile first. While our user would most likely be carrying a larger desktop screen with her for business. Mobile first made sense in the context of being one of the more useful screens in getting to know a new city. If Claire was going to check a map on route to her experience to make sure she was heading in the correct direction this would be mobile. If she was to use a feature that allowed her to schedule an uber to pick her up and take her to this experience. Confirming the details of that pickup and staying updated on it would be mobile.
At the same time, choosing to start with the smallest screen would aid us in conducting a feature prioritisation. The goal of which was to find clarity in what constituted the principle interaction of our service. What was the MVP in getting Claire to her final goal and what features provided in the brief and discovered in our research came into play?
Mapping features to the matrix was led by group discussion around what the core goal of our service was. To browse and book a local experience. Also around what would make our service stand apart from its competitors. An example of this would be nearby functionality or the emphasis of distance to experience for certain users. We also gave consideration to features that would help us to create moments of joy for our users, such as rescheduling bookings. For such a short sprint we concluded that the most value for both our user and client would be found in the ‘essential — low effort/ expense’ quadrant. Though also noticed that features that could create joy for our user were located in the opposite quadrant. So this balance would need to be watched and re-assessed later on in our process. However, we were able to bring focus to a set of features to keep in mind as we concluded the define phase.
Ready to read part 2? Or maybe just bookmark it for later? Then click here 👈
Thank You Interpretive Dance 🕺
Thank you for taking the time to read this case study, even if it was only a portion of it. If you have any feedback or questions I would love for you to share them. As you may already know my name is Tim Hazzard, I am a UX Designer and somebody who is always positive, always trying and always curious.
Most recently I have completed a 10-week intensive course at General Assembly London. It refreshed me on methodologies I had learnt before while studying Industrial Design. It also gave me the practical skills to enter the industry as a UX designer.
