Do you want to run better one-on-one meetings ?
Frizby is a new app in the HR market. It gives you guidance, tips and helps you be a better manager and advisor to your team.
They have a good customer base, very active, allowing them to have continuous feedback on features of their application. And that’s precious.
They decided to do their first makeover this year and invited me to be part of it.
Above all, I had to focus on the implementation of a new information architecture to redesign the entire experience. And finally, give it a brand new UI design.
The first definition hypothesis was quite simple: write a message, receive the answers and do a face-to-face interview with your teammates.
But I had to question this proposal in order to validate it. I had to understand how the application works and the needs of the users. I felt that Frizby had more to offer than it was showing at that moment.
The process seemed simple and my ambition was to create a strong UX that could lead to a strong UI design: use all the feedbacks received from users, analyze the current app, compare the competitors in this market that I do not know very well at that time, and interview managers who are likely to use this application.
To define the new product experience.
First of all, I tried to understand the market where Frizby fitted. Specialized HR tool. In between a tool of HR, that can create reports, and a tool that can set up team meetings.
I started with a kind of Guerilla UX research to learn as much as possible before starting with a more traditional way of research.
To understand the complete context of use and how this context contributes to the relationship between the user and Frizby, I realized a contextual inquiry. Looking for other products and processes used in conjunction with Frizbys: analyzing other products reviews, other products support website, digging into blogs and forums about HR tools, Linkedin groups about HR…etc
It was clear that the demand is present and that many varied tools exist. It was, therefore, necessary to start by setting up a Value Proposition with a first hypothesis of problems that could be solved by Frizby. In order to give to Frizby a real opportunity to stand out.
My value proposition and solution hypothesis
Value proposition: Frizby is a tool for « dialogue ». Frizby helps managers who want to give and get recognition regularly by optimizing their time and giving them personal advice, tips and tools.
Hypothesis of solutions: Frizby must provide something of value with little effort on the part of the participants.
Frizby should give assistance related to the problems encountered by a manager on the day-to-day and over time.
But does a manager know he needs advice? And is he willing to accept it?
Validation with current users of Frizby
By analyzing previous feedbacks from current users of Frizby, this is what has been highlighted and helps to answer this crucial question.
Every new manager accepts without worries to need advice. Those who are more experienced are quite ready to use a tool that guides them in their discussions if it allows them to gain data regularly, if it does not require too much commitment on their part and if that guarantees an active participation from their teammates.
Time control + Minimal effort = Strong Engagement from every part
Why not! But at that moment Frizby’s interface couldn’t answer correctly to this formula.
Validation with user testing
Based on this primary analysis and my assumptions, I realized a series of user testing, including managers and non-managers.
What I got out of it:
➣ Managers expected the app to just work effortlessly
➣ Failure of the information architecture
➣ A real imbalance between design and function
➣ Tools more or less instinctive
➣ Managers like the idea of using an app as a support
➣ The image of Frizby is completely absent
The main problem coming from this both analysis
Nobody uses the app for starting a meeting.
Most users stop at the process of creating questions and sending questions. They appreciate the fact to be guided through it and that they could rely on it. They consider this process very useful. But they do not use the app to end it, during and after the meeting.
No one uses the app for starting a meeting.
How might we help managers having better meetings ?
Impact of the first researches on the personas definition
and Benchmarking ⟳
In collaboration with the business analyst and internal stakeholders, we defined the scope of the project and redefined the Value Proposition: Frizby, with its features, ensures managers to always enjoy conversations with their teammates.
From that point of view, we redefined Frizby’s goals:
☛ Help to start discussion
☛ Offers tools that give managers more time control
☛ Gives value and creates commitment through meetings
☛ (not to mention the slightly more business-like aspect of the process) create data, to be analyzed by stakeholders, that proves the real commitment of all users
All managers have daily concerns they would like receive advice on, including attitude, behavior, competence, delegation, planning, workload and time management
Until now it has been easy 😀
Before I could really invest time into UI design and had to start working more deeply on the architecture of the application. To really set up each process used in the app.
A giant puzzle was put in place.
It was necessary to break down each step, to name them and put them back in where they belong, taking into account the three moments of life of this application: the « before », « during » and « after » a meeting.
I created a definition of all the status of these steps. While having in mind the needs of « guidance » highlighted at the beginning of the research.
A lot of things can happen during the preparation of a meeting that will automatically influence the way in which the meeting takes place and the way in which the information retained from these meetings is then transposed into usable data.
Thanks to a lot of card sorting sessions, I set up a first possible architecture solution.
I set up new scenarios mainly focused on the user « manager ».
First low fidelity wireframes
And via Balsamiq we created law fidelity wireframes to test our first assumptions.
We were rather satisfied with this first architecture.
Our proposal seemed to answer the main questions of how to follow the user throughout the process of preparation until the end of a meeting.
The entry into play of a new stakeholder with new insights changed the point of view.
I had to completely break up everything, to build a new architecture based on these new insights.
This was time-consuming but very revealing!
Subsequently, it led me to review also the construction of processes on mobile. The app would not be used exactly the same way on mobile and this reflection brought me a new vision on the whole application. And clearly motivate my aesthetic choices for the entire app.
High fidelity wireframes
Following a very enlightened opinion of one of the stakeholders to whom I had asked to redefine the tools and processes of Frizby in a very pictorial way, I did, again, a quick benchmarking analysis by focusing on the applications of marketing emailing campaign.
The parallel between these two ways of proceeding was really interesting and allowed us to combine all our researches to inform my design strategy. It was time to invest in high fidelity wireframes.
The first user testing was the fundament to all our thinking.
I felt from the beginning of the project a real interest in the idea of focusing on the Personas I created.
All the architectural work, that had never been done before, really created new insights from all the team.
Frizby can affirm confidently to know the « why » of their existence but more importantly the « how » they offer their services!