Go home
Banking

Banking product

Role: UX Researcher, UX Designer

Competitor analysis
Service Safari
Information architecture
Tree testing
User testing

Overview

The client aims to launch a challenger bank for the UK and Gibraltar markets, allowing users to seamlessly manage both fiat and crypto while ensuring high-quality customer service

Goal

The aim was to evaluate and review existing design artifacts, such as the information architecture, and to create a seamless onboarding process that would be ready for implementation.

What I did

Impact
Provided data-driven recommendations for restructuring the information architecture

TL;DR

I conducted research and testing to evaluate navigation options for a payment system. My insights guided the design direction, helping to shape a more intuitive user experience.

Desk research

During desk research, I identified two navigation variants that required validation. The first option allowed users to proceed with payments first and then select the currency (crypto or fiat) afterward. The second approach separated actions based on whether they involved crypto or fiat currencies, with distinct entry points for each. My task was to assess which navigation solution would be the most effective and intuitive for the system. I conducted space safari and competitor analysis to get a better picture of the landscape. However, I wanted to explore the experimental path that’s why I chose to go with tree testing.

I chose tree testing because it allowed me to efficiently evaluate both the entire information architecture and the navigation structure at the same time.

Mock-up of menu navigation that was tested with separation to variants

Setting up tree testing

I used the existing information architecture provided by the client to validate it during testing, making necessary adjustments to illustrate the different navigation mechanics for each tested variant. I thendeveloped scenarios for 11 participants to navigate, requiring them to select elements within the architecture to reach their desired outcomes. I recruited 11 people and divided them between two sets of tests.

I measured directness, indicating the percentage of participants who found the correct links without backtracking, as well as the time taken to complete each task. Here are examples of the tasks participants needed to follow:

Research outcome

There is no clear indication of which navigation structure is considerably more efficient. However, the results show that variant 1 has a higher average success score and a lower failure rate. Additionally, for variant 1, the direct success rate is lower. The longer median completion time may be attributed to users spending an extended period on one specific task, as observed during the tests, where participants averaged 2 minutes and 4 seconds on that task.

Despite the results being closely matched, I chose to proceed with variant. However, I suggested conducting usability testing during the early wireframe stages to maintain a close understanding of user needs and preferences.

Mock-up of menu navigation that was tested with separation to variants

Conclusions

The desk research phase of this project was particularly challenging due to the limited time available to review the materials provided by the client. A significant portion of the work involved analyzing the existing information architecture, trying to understand its structure and the rationale behind it. Despite these hurdles, the client was ultimately very positive about the test results and the insights gained.

Retrospective insights - what I would have done differently now

  1. (If not for the time constraints), I would create low-fidelity wireframes and conduct usability testing to complement the results of the tree testing - this approach would potentially allow me to identify any defects in the information architecture more effectively
White-label NFT MarketplaceLifestyle product