Stress-free removals? Good Donkey is here to help
Modern city dwellers deserve a reliable way to move houses. That’s why they choose Good Donkey.
TYPE OF PROJECT: Native app, Service Design
MY RESPONSIBILITIES: Research, Writing, Product Design, UX Strategy, UI Design, Testing
TOOLBOX: Figma, Adobe Illustrator, Maze
PRODUCT DESIGN FRAMEWORKS: Moscow method, Six Thinking Hats, Impact-Effort matrix
UX METHODS: User interviews, Affinity mapping, Competitive and comparative analysis, Persona building, Task analysis, Journey mapping, Userflow, User stories, Wireframes, Prototype feedback session, Heat maps, Quantitative and qualitative testing
Good Donkey app started off as a response to my classmate’s complaint. Henry described to me how the shortage of good providers forced him to ask his family for help when moving. A couple of interviews and wireframes later, I was able to build a high-fidelity prototype of a native app that eases the burden of removals. See how I filled the void in the market.
Listening empathetically
During my first interview with Henry, I sensed that one of the most painful moments in the process was the initial search for providers who could meet Henry’s criteria. My assumption was later confirmed in the subsequent interviews I conducted with other users. Similarly to Henry, they have also found that searching for a good provider is a murky process and the online presence of removal companies is often limited to an outdated website where the only point of contact is a fillable form.
Trusted, comprehensive and affordable
I collated the trends that emerged from the users’ interviews through an affinity mapping exercise. Price, feedback and timing were the three main subjects that all of my users mentioned as the decisive factors when selecting the removal company.
To consolidate my research, I formed a problem statement that would best convey the pain points and suggestions my users had shared with me during the interviews. The statement read “the user needs an effective way to pick a removal company that offers trusted, comprehensive and affordable services. This way they can move houses stress-free.”
Crystallising the statement at such an early stage of my research was a risky and arbitrary strategy and I knew that I should treat it more as a compass rather than a rigid checkbox. However, simmering down the problem to two however imperfect assumptions was a helpful segue into thinking of what features the new product should have to alleviate my user’s worries.
An untapped place in the service market
At this stage, I expanded the scope of my research and looked to my competitors to see how they deal with the problem of moving.
A new kid around the block, Stackt sells moving and storage services that are flexible and adaptive to one’s needs. I ran a task analysis, assuming I wanted to book a removal van for the following week. Despite their claim of adaptiveness and charming UI, I found that their system resembles a dry contact form that my users had mentioned during the interviews. The same one-way contact flow that was simply repackaged in more attractive apparel.
Shift seemed more promising. Their USP was using existing vans on the road which avoids unnecessary extra trips. This eco-friendly highlight appeared to be an amazing and unique solution. Who wouldn’t want to save the planet while getting their boxes sorted? However, the more I dug into the customer feedback, the more I realised that there is a blind spot in this strategy, especially for those wanting to move quickly. Similarly to Uber, the availability of drivers fluctuates, depending on when and where you want to move to.
In the course of my competitive analysis, I realised that there is a place for my product in this, admittedly, crowded market. To stand up to the challenge, I would provide a platform for only verified providers to sell their services on the future app. The ball would be on the user’s side. No more waiting to get back to you while the boxes are already packed. My idea was that the customer should decide which company suited their moving needs best at any time.
It’s time to pack his boxes for Henry
Once I gathered what type of product I was now aiming to create, I found it useful to look at my research data again and think about who I am designing it for.
Henry, a busy city dweller who just got a job in a different country seemed a perfect person to test my ideas against. He doesn’t have much time, has plenty of stuff to move, is tech-savvy and cares deeply about the smoothness of the process with all the other paperwork to sort out while moving abroad.
I created an imaginary itinerary for Henry’s moving day. It was particularly helpful to be able to consult this user journey plan with my interviewees. This way I made sure that the emotions accompanying my user through this special day matched my interviewee’s personal struggles. Building a journey map was an eye-opening experience. From data and analysis findings, I could now think of real-life experiences and how my product can facilitate people’s lives next time they want to avoid another dreaded removal.
Say goodbye to the dispensable
With the problem statement and the persona in mind, I asked my interviewees to help me once again and look at the issue from a variety of perspectives. During the Six Thinking Hats session, we articulated a list of possible solutions to Henry’s dilemma.
I chose this method as the best way to spot the growth opportunities and weaknesses of my ideas. In a group of 3, we assumed the role of negative, factual, emotional, organisational, positive and creative thinkers. This UX “cosplay” was not only a great exercise in imagination and acting. It gave me a chance to cross out faulty ideas and selected the promising ones before I sat at the drawing board.
Subsequently, I used the Impact-Effort matrix to streamline our ideation and prioritise a list of features that would address users’ concerns in the future MVP. Given the stringent timeline to deliver the product, I opted for the easy wins, the combination of low effort and maximum impact.
What goes first, what goes next
Although I had a pool of interesting feature ideas, in order to start building a product, I needed to set them in a sequence. This way, when handling the design stage of my process, I knew which features I should develop first as the top priority for customer satisfaction.
To tie it all together, I created a user flow, beginning with the landing page and ending with the user achieving their primary goal of finding the most suitable removal company.
Sketching it out
Going into the wireframe stage, I created a journey map for my persona which spanned from finding a removal provider to successfully arriving at the desired destination.
To address any potential paint points Henry might have in the process, I signposted the flow with some useful app features, including the ability to track the removal van en route or the option to filter the companies by feedback.
Good Donkey at your fingertips
The iterated result is a high-fidelity prototype that offers a solution to the problem set out at the beginning of the process. The Good Donkey app addresses a niche in the market by offering a clear, learnable and user-friendly path for finding a removal company at the user’s fingertips. The inclusion of the tracking feature or the ability to directly talk to the providers sets this product apart in a competitive service industry.
The app makes it more intuitive to find the right provider. A functional way of inputting information about the user’s desired company guarantees that only the most suitable suggestions are prompted.
To give the user the autonomy of selection, they can also narrow down the results to display the providers with the best price, feedback or timeframe for responses.
● See how this product works on adamwieclawski.com
Let’s confront it with the user
The usability testing stage was a valuable opportunity to confront the assumptions I had about the product with the user’s factual experience. To facilitate the task, I created a list of three instructions that would help me gauge the prototype’s learnability and utility.
The tasks included “Please assume you have a set budget of £2,000 for your next move. Could you please record this requirement on the app?”; the second one “You are planning to move from Paris to London on 1 November 2021. You wish to pack your 50kg box yourself and want to track the removal van en route. Can you please show me how you would use the app to help you with the task?”; and finally “Can you please find and select the cheapest provider who could help you with the said move to London?”
The quantitative goal at the testing stage was for all 3 users to complete all 3 tasks in under 2 minutes. The qualitative aim was for the users to complete the said tasks with minimum confusion.
The first task was intended to gauge the user’s initial reaction to the prototype’s layout and the learnability of the bottom bar. I wanted to see if they could quickly find the profile setting required to set the budget. 12 out of 12 users responded positively to the prototype’s visual design and its structure. They also met a 1-minute benchmark to complete the task.
The second task was a test of the landing screen’s discoverability. 11 out of 12 users enjoyed a slider presented on the page. 1 user wished to see the menu more prominent on the home page. I addressed those concerns in the subsequent iteration.
The third task was a test of the filter feature. 12 out of 12 users had no problem finding the button that would allow them to sort the result and bring the cheapest provider to the top of the list. 1 user reported that although they had no difficulty sorting the results, they found that the decision to give the “Refine results” and “Search again” buttons the same importance in size and placement on the page could cause frustration for the user in the future; the user implied that if they wanted to refine the search once again, they could potentially click the “Search again” button which would bring them back to the search mode again. I addressed this potential complication by only keeping the “Refine results” button in the upper right-hand corner of the screen.
10 out of 12 users responded positively to the discoverability of the prototype’s structure, the intuitiveness of the search filters and the transparency of the interface.
If you listen closely, a great business idea will come
Coming up with a solution to the problem experienced by my classmate underscored the importance of empathy for the user. I understood that to create a good product, the designer must put themselves in the shoes of the user. Staying inquisitive during the interviews or resilient when a solution requires further iterations are all part of the UX process.
With this project, I also got to see in practice how a well-crafted ideation session can help the designer avoid potential roadblocks in the sprint and calibrate their thinking toward more effective and agile answers.
Resources that helped me
Lou Downe’s “Good Services” is a fantastic resource that helped me a great deal during the ideation stage. Coming up with new ideas was great fun but when the time came to distil them into a series of deliverables, I need an expert voice to know what would and wouldn’t work. I especially took to heart Principle 10 “Evenly distribute the complexity” when designing the prototype flows.
Chapter 11 in Jake Knapp’s “Sprint” on deciding which ideas are the best with the help of others helped me structure an write a plan for the Six Thinking Hats session.
Finally, the most invaluable resource were my users. Sharing their often traumatic removal stories was indispensable in getting this project off the ground.
