top of page

Freelance Research Project

This freelance research project for a large company is confidential. While I can't discuss the details, I can outline challenges, UX tools and thinking that I used during this project, along with the unexpected outcome. The goal of the project was to create a new internal workflow that increased efficiency for the user while avoiding duplicate work. 

My Role

UX Researcher

Timeline

Two Months

Tools

FigJam

01

Initial Set Up: Errors at the start of the project were not monitored or corrected, creating an influx of incorrect work.

02

Duplicate Work: Due to incorrect set up, work was duplicated for 4 departments as they completed rework checks/corrections.

The Solution

I presented two solutions: the first corrected the initial set up errors with the change of one procedure. This reduced the number of affected departments from six down to two. The alternate solution kept the original work flow, but corrected 3 areas of work duplication.

The Problem

Research

Interviews

5

  • Interviewees were department heads and users most affected by the outdated procedures

  • I held multiple observational and informal interviews over the course of 4 weeks

User Flow

1

  • I created a user flow to depict the current workflow, and iterated on it with four departments over 4 weeks

  • This visual will be included in several department SOPs, and helped clarify many areas of rework

Key Takeaways

2

  • Poor communication across departments resulting in duplicate or incorrect work

  • There are several solutions to user problems including training pieces, reviews, and an overhaul of initial setup procedures

Research Observations:

Communication: There was low visibility of each part of the process among the departments that worked on this, which created duplication of work and information silos. 

Reporting: The way each project was initially set up was incorrect, which created bloated reports for at least 2 departments. These reports had to be reviewed for corrections, but are currently behind as the team cannot keep up with the influx of incorrect work.

Maintenance: There was no current best practice set for maintenance of completed work, which affects current and future operations. 

Role Definition: There was no clear definition of role responsibilities, creating frustration and potential overstepping as certain departments made decisions for all involved, without having the authority to do so.

Implementations:

Training: The team in charge of initial setup will benefit from training to reduce the amount of incorrect work. This is in process by the project manager, who has three key points to train (with opportunities for more).

Staffing: One team member was assigned to help with reviewing bloated reports 

Cross-Departmental Communication: Two meetings were held, ranging from 17-20 participants to discuss common issues. Several heated debates resulted in good compromises to move toward a more efficient process.

Conclusion

I submitted two proposed solutions for the problems that the users experienced. These solutions were presented to five department heads. Neither solution was accepted in full. I was happy to see small fixes implemented due to my research, and I see many opportunities for growth in the future. I know that with a project this large, spanning this many departments, adoption of new practices will take time. 

Learnings:

The strength of any research project is how well you can communicate the findings across multiple departments and skill levels. I learned that even with detailed explanations and suggestions, some stakeholders will not buy in to what is best for the group. This project was interesting, since the project manager making the decisions was not personally affected by any of the user issues, and did not see the need to correct them.

I learned that all you can do is present the research in a comprehensive and clear manner, and then leave it up to the PM's decision. I also learned that there are many solutions to a problematic user flow, and a great researcher can compromise and adapt to make some small wins for the betterment of the whole. 

bottom of page