A personal trainer that comes to your home
Case Study for Body You’s in-home personal training appointment booking MVP
Body You is a new service offered by Body Collective which offers in-home personal training for £30.00/session. In addition to the great price, another Unique Selling Proposition (USP) for Body You is they match you to a personal trainer based on their unique personality matching system.
When Body You first approached us, they had recently launched a mobile booking application that was difficult for their clients to use. With that in mind, for the most part all scheduling happened primarily via text messages and phone calls. Billing typically happened over the phone or through invoicing. As a small company with 14 personal trainers, this was time consuming and not a great experience for either Body You personal trainers nor their clients. In addition when on-boarding new clients, they required everyone went to their web site to take their personality matching test before they were able to schedule appointments with trainers.
“We need to create a simple app that is user-friendly for clients to purchase and make bookings. This would hugely improve the Body You product and increase our traffic and revenue” — Body You
Design a mobile experience that highlighted the Body You USP’s of price and personality matching, in addition to simplifying and improving scheduling and bookings.
PROJECT TEAM SPECIFICS
Client: Body Collective
Team Members: Chaymae, Zahir, and Wendy (myself)
My Role: UX/UI Designer and Team Facilitator
Process: Agile, Double-Diamond
Sprint: 2 1/2 weeks
Prior to our first meeting with our client, we set out to do a competitive analysis to understand the current landscape. It became obvious really quickly that from a booking perspective, Body You and most of their competitors all used the same white labeled third-party application from Mind Body for bookings. There was one competitor, TrueBe that created their own custom application, more tailored to their business and end user needs.
Competitive analysis takaways:
- Body You’s mobile application only allowed for single one-off bookings. If a user wanted to book a few sessions a week, they would need to go into the mobile application and pay for one session at a time.
- The Body You USP of personal trainer matching happened on their web site and not within their application.
- An end user needed to know to go to the web site first before they could download the application to their mobile device.
- Registering and logging into the Body You application for the first time was rather painful. Long registration web forms that weren’t responsive/mobile friendly.
- The application itself was rather clunky, and difficult to navigate. Most navigation elements lived under a hamburger menu. This was true for all competitive apps as well.
VALIDATING THE BRIEF
After our initial kick-off meeting with Body You we set out to validate their brief. We knew we wanted to interview Body You clients to understand their current scheduling and booking pain points, but also wanted to reach out to additional potential users of the app. With that in mind we created a simple screener survey to find additional interviewee’s who have used, or currently use personal trainers to stay fit. In all we interviewed 17 people, which gave us great insight into the struggles people were having with existing methods of scheduling.
To get a better overall picture of our end users, we conducted interpretation sessions of each interview to gather data points in order to build out our affinity diagram. Through this process we were easily able to identify pain points, personas and emotional journeys.
- It’s hard for clients to manage bookings through text messaging
- It frustrated users to book appointments via text messages due to reply wait times
- People are frustrated by trainers who don’t understand who they are and what motivates them — they want someone who knows them and their goals
- People never used the mobile application, as they liked booking 1–2 weeks in advance, and the current application only allowed for one off bookings
From our Affinity Diagram we were able to identify two personas — Sandra and Harris.
Harris’s current personal training schedule experience as you can see starts out less than ideal, as he has no insight into his personal trainers availability. When sending his trainer a text or WhatsApp message to schedule an appointment he’s wondering when will he get a reply? Can his trainer meet his schedule? How long is this process going to take?
Even after a successful booking, his happiness is just above the line as it really shouldn’t take long to schedule an appointment.
Given that we would be asking end users to take a personality quiz prior to being able to find or even book with a trainer, we all agreed that our approach would be to design a fun quiz and user-friendly mobile application that allowed Sandra and Harris to match with their best personal trainer and book sessions efficiently.
From a business and UX perspective, we concentrated our efforts in two areas:
- Emphasis on the Body You USPs:
- Personal trainer matching based on your personality.
- A price point of £30.00/session
- Design and improve the booking process.
At the end of Discovery, we consolidated our findings and presented them to our client. In our presentation, we walked them through our research above, and laid out the problems we wanted to solve with them via Design Studio.
Design Problem 1: Match Sandra to her best personal trainer
PROBLEM 2: Allow Harris to easily book appointments with his personal trainer (Assumption: Harris is already logged in and has been matched to his trainer.)
Our Design Studio Summary
- Make the login simple. Login via Facebook or e-mail address/password
- Make the quiz fun and easy. Instead of boring radio buttons, we wanted to focus on an interactive experience
- Trainer results — we agreed to highlight four trainers on the match page in a visual fun hierarchy
- The trainer bio page — allow users to see other compatible trainers in case they didn’t like the one with the highest recommendation
- Make it easy to book one-to-many sessions with a trainer
- Store credit card data to make rebooking easier
- Know the user — home location, booking history, trainer history
- And the last takeaway from our design studio was to figure out how we would advertise the personality matching quiz. Would it be subtle? Would it be direct and upfront? Would we allow users to view fitness categories and once they decided to book be sent to the personality quiz? How much of what Body You has to offer would be exposed prior to taking the personality quiz. These were things we decided we’d determine during user testing.
With our research complete, and the design studio outcomes in mind, we set out develop and test possible solutions to the problems we needed to solve.
Paper Prototyping & Testing
Initially, we created a set of paper prototypes to test on users. In the end we went through several rounds of paper testing
Some key areas we wanted to test at the paper level were:
- How do we expose the personality quiz to the user?
- How long can the quiz be in order to get the data the client needs without being too long?
- Do users understand the trainer weighting system?
- Can they easily navigate the application?
- How easy is it to book one-to-many appointments with a trainer?
- How easy is it to rebook an appointment with a trainer?
- Having a context sensitive “Book Now” button that took users to either their trainers page or the start of the personality quiz confused users. The call to action to take the personality quiz needed to be more prominent and obvious.
- The quiz was too long. We initially had a set of 25 questions, and we would need to work with our client to simplify that experience
- The personal trainer results page was too confusing. From a paper prototype perspective, the visual layout interfered with functionality
- Our booking calendar was confusing. It wasn’t clear what time slots were available vs. already booked
Simplify personality and trainer results
Form follows function. And although we wanted to make the matched personal trainer results page visually fun and playful, it completely failed. At a paper prototype level, there was zero understanding as to what we were trying to accomplish with what we thought was a “fun” approach to displaying results.
Round 2 learnings:
We simplified the layout and went with a standard results design pattern, highlighting the trainer who was most recommended and compatible. This worked well with user understanding, but users also wanted to know what their personality type was. Which is why we came up with including an end user personality result with their matches
Personal Trainer Bio and Booking Page
In general, the booking calendar confused people. We initially thought that we would display current bookings and open/available spots too book. The confusion came with trying to understand which one was which. In this same round of testing, we decided to add a + sign to indicate to a user that they could book that time spot. That worked better, but the design in general wasn’t very extensible from a real estate standpoint. We wanted users to be able to see the available times on any given days without really having to scroll.
Round 2 learnings:
In the second round of prototypes, we decided to only show the hours available for booking. This worked better and was easily understood, however we were still trying to show multiple days and hours, and we questioned what the user experience would be like if there were 12 open time slots available. For the sake of simplifying the experience, we opted to show only time slots available for a single day at a time, while giving users the ability to tab to another day to check availability and book additional days. Our 3rd paper prototype worked well, and we were confident in moving forward with digital prototypes.
Digitizing and testing our prototype
Once we felt like we were at a solid place with our paper prototypes, we began digitizing our wireframes for testing. For the most part, things tested ok.
Some things that still needed improvement:
- Home page
- There was still not enough emphasis on USP of personality matching
- Needed to simplify home page and include all fitness categories
- Trainer page needs adjustment — we wanted to make sure the entire calendar fit within the page without scrolling
- Personality quiz’s swipe functionality was not clear
- Personality results didn’t tell user what their personality type was, just matched them to a set of trainers.
Home page updates
We ended up going back to the home page drawing board and decided to do another design studio. Our goal was to come up with a new home page design that highlighted the USP of personality matching, while also showcasing the fitness categories, so that users knew what Body You offered.We essentially went back to the home page drawing board, and did another design studio. Our goal on our home page on first run, pre personality quiz, and post personality quiz. We weren’t giving much context to the USP or personality matching.
So in the end we focused on making the USP of personality matching more prominent by creating a grid system for the home page. On first launch (or prior to taking the personality quiz) there would be an advertisement in the top tile. After the quiz was taken, end users would just see the categories on the home page within their respective quadrant.
Below we mapped out how the grid would work as Body You’s business grew and services expanded. This grid gives them the extensibility they need for future service growth.
With everything else, we easily found solutions. We combined the personality quiz and compatible trainer results into a single page. For the quiz, we enabled swipe functionality (similar to tinder swiping), but also included buttons. With regards to the calendar, we were confident it just needed a bit of visual design tweaking to get the results we wanted.
Once we found a better solution for our home page, we began working defining the user interface design, along with packaging up our deliverables.
In the end, we presented our client with two visual options. The first being very similar and inline with their current brand, and the second a bit more playful and a direction we had hoped they’d consider. In the end they stayed with the first visual design style that best matched their current brand.