Dear Zipcar, here’s why I’m using your competitor
Here is a real-life example of why we should never, ever forget that edge cases can make or break our experience:
In the last week, I have called Zipcar 8 times and spent countless hours trying to give them my money. And it still hasn’t happened.
Why? A combination of broken tech, confusing user journeys, poor customer service and usability problems. Sadly, it’s not just Zipcar that can suffer from these issues. It’s everyone. This post a cautionary tale and an attempt to brainstorm some ways forward.
Why is this a problem? Maybe I’m just a whiny customer or a ‘stupid user?’ It’s a problem because it’s directly preventing Zipcar from achieving a core business goal: converting me from a prospect to a paying customer.
Whenever I work with service companies—especially startups—one of the main goals is to move prospects to paying customers as quickly as possible. This process has been widely visualised as a funnel: many customers learn about your service, some decide it’s for them, fewer others do some stuff in your product, some give you money, come back again and again, and a few tell their friends about it and they give you their money. This is the dream:
The important thing to note is that less and less people progress from each step to the next. Therefore, each prospect is a precious resource that should be treated with care.
Case in point: Zipcar
Zipcar is a leading car-sharing service. Their value prop is simple: you borrow a car for short periods of time and pay only for the rental time. No insurance, petrol, or other hassles. Sounds simple, much like the process they advertise for signing up for the service:
Let’s explore the first step: join. This is a step a service company should desire to make as easy and quick as possible. The objective of this step is simple: acquire a user and take their money.
At the time of writing, it has been six days and counting and I still have not been able to become Zipcar’s customer. In effect, Zipcar have built a wall between me and my objective: preventing me from becoming a paying customer, using their service, building up loyalty, and recommending them to others. Zipcar have stopped me from becoming a valuable customer.
Zipcar have stopped me from becoming a valuable customer.
Problem #1: Convoluted user journey
Is this the idea Zipcar had when promising simplicity and freedom? I doubt it. I imagine the process they designed looks something like this:
Now, let’s consider what the customer doesn’t see. In order to rent a car, there are some security checks Zipcar must perform on your license. I do not know them all, but I have learned two processes that Zipcar does in the background before your account gets approved: confirm your payment details match your driver’s license name, and do a background check with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).
Here is what the entire process may look like:
However, in our case, there were three issues: our bank card did not match our payment card, the new payment card returned an error, and the automatic DVLA check failed.
Note that the failed steps are internal to the Zipcar logic and security rules. I am not questioning their necessity, but I am shocked at the impact it had on me as a prospective customer. Here is the actual journey I had:
Eventually we began to argue. The word Zipcar became a stressor. Our week was tainted with failed attempts to sign up to their service.
What’s the lesson here? Design the alternative journeys, not just the ideal ones:
- what happens if a user began an application but got interrupted?
- what happens if a user didn’t read the instructions?
- what happens if a couple or a family sign up?
- what if a user who hasn’t been approved needs to log in?
Here is a simple example. After creating my account, I received an email that my membership application could not be completed without a step I must do over the phone. Zipcar also proactively called me within hours — brownie points for that! However, I soon found out that I could not complete the phone step without first logging in and updating my payment information.
Funnily enough, I could not log in. First, there was no login button on the homepage and even when I found the login screen, the login failed. It seemed that Zipcar had not yet created my account (presumably a server logic issue). But… I could reset my password and access my account, which would last until I logged out. In total, I had to reset my password four times to try and follow the steps customer service asked me to follow.
My partner who doesn’t work in technology simply gave up after the login error. And I assume countless others are doing the same. He tried creating a new account and starting over but his driving license was already tied to our existing account, which we could not access, edit or delete.
“But how can we know if the journey we designed is convoluted?” I hear voices ask. We can’t always know this in advance. And with a company that provides a service across multiple touchpoints for a wide audience it becomes increasingly more difficult to predict this.
Luckily, we don’t need to predict usability issues. We can test the journeys we designed to ensure they are usable. We must pay particular attention to the onboarding and sign up experiences. There’s no point in having a great experience for existing customers if you have none.
Remember this: there’s no point in having a great experience for existing customers if you have none.
Aside from that, consider the whole journey and ask: “what will happen if this step goes wrong?” At our company, we call this Quality Assurance. Shipping a product without testing is as risky as riding a motorbike without a helmet. You will probably be fine, but do you really want to chance it?
Problem #2: Failure to unblock the user journey
This is where Zipcar fails the most. Even the most poorly designed journey that leads a customer to speak with a representative is a situation we can salvage. But only if we unblock the barriers to the next step in the funnel.
A problem paying for your service is not the user’s problem, it is a fundamental business problem.
Zipcar has failed to do this for nearly a week. If my partner and I were to invoice Zipcar for the work we have done to sign up to their service so far (writing this post not included)—based on our day rates—I estimate we would bill them upward of £600. Let’s do some simple maths:
My partner is a lawyer so I could probably pad this out further by making a case about emotional damages, but I digress.
Jokes aside, let’s explore how I might approach designing my service to ensure customers derive benefits and not losses as a result of using it.
Step 1: make a list of known or imagined problems a customer may face. In the case of Zipcar, we can use my complaints so far as a basis:
Now, let’s consider what we want out of the interaction. What is the ideal business outcome? When we try to acquire users, we typically want to educate them about the benefits of joining or take their money. Then, let’s consider the ideal response that would accomplish the outcome. Finally, compare it to the reality.
The common theme of Zipcar’s actions is sending the customer away to do work in order to resolve the problem. This is a risky tactic because prospects who aren’t yet converted may suffer from motivation loss, forgetfulness, or simply give up.
Next, consider what actions can be taken to remedy the causes of the wrong response. If I were at Zipcar, I would consider taking these actions:
- Re-design the user flow to prevent customer mistakes (e.g., card name not matching account name) and troubleshoot autonomously during difficulties. Test this user flow.
- re-write error messages to proactively offer solutions
- ensure forms with errors retain information the user has entered
- ensure customer service representatives have access to the same information and procedures
- ensure continuation between customer inquiries across touchpoints
- investigate how to best resolve technical problems related to payment and authentication
- brief reps on basic customer service skills e.g., do not blame the customer when they have done something wrong
To make it very clear: a problem paying for your service is not the user’s problem — it is a fundamental business problem because you are quite literally preventing people from giving you their money. This list is not unique to Zipcar, it should be seriously considered by any service provider.
Conclusion: take edge cases seriously
This isn’t about benevolence, wanting to help people, or other things User Experience folks like me care about. This is about business.
In the last decade, I have come across countless discussions about edge cases: those scenarios where the customer does something we deem wrong, encounters an unlikely problem, or faces a challenge. Let’s face it: thinking about these edge cases is annoying. It‘s also difficult and expensive. It makes designing and building an experience take longer and it makes our teams face uncomfortable questions.
When we design experiences for customers, designing for the ‘edge cases’ isn’t a luxury: it is a must for our services to be viable and to carry our brand identity well. A failure to do so can, and will, drive customers away.
No one is immune to mistakes, but everyone can try to fix them. Especially if it means seeing real business results. So today, ask yourself where in your user journey or your acquisition funnel you are failing your customers. And then, buckle down and fix it.
Edit: since writing this piece, an incredibly competent Zipcar representative managed to approve our application within a five minute call. This deems the title false but further proves my point.
Evgenia (Jenny) Grinblo is a London-based User Experience practitioner. She is passionate about building great things with others and facilitating happiness at work and at home. Find her on Twitter.
