Week 15\16 - Usability Tests Session (24\03-07\04)

After the energetic work on the apartment profile screen, we went out for usability tests in order to test our work on the users and get feedback accordingly.

First, we have defined three scenarios that we will present to users to perform the usability tests properly (attached to the scenarios in the link). Next, we compiled the table of performance metrics (KPIs) we did last week, which will help us define and track our progress towards goals related to interface design while reflecting user behavior into practical insights that will enhance the product usability experience.

We conducted about 15 usability tests in total this week.

Each group member has a tab in the table where he can fill in the insights that came up in his tests. Attach a Google Sheets file for user testing details:

It should be noted that after a long period of working on MVP screens, it was nice and refreshing to meet people and share the product with them.

The general impression we got from the users is positive and even many testified that they are excited to be able to use the app. Aside from the group satisfaction, the tests made us realize that we are on the right path and that the problem is true as acute as we believe.

To summarize the process, we met to discuss findings and insights accordingly. We will now note what the the most common insights that came up and how we corrected them accordingly:

• Micro-copy: Despite the research we conducted and the attempt to adapt the language to the target audience, many users testified that there are problems and are unable to understand the intent, such as CTA buttons or the titles of the various sects. For example: "must-see pictures" - many did not understand where the pictures came from, why they were presented to them.

How we fixed that? Before:

After:

• Navigation menu: Another common problem was the duplication we chose to display the apartment save function in favorites. On the one hand, we used the "heart" sign in the top menu to save the apartment and on the other hand, we used the navigation bar with the "saved" icon. This has confused users and a misunderstanding about the save option.

How we fixed that?

Before:

After:

** As you can see, we noticed that the location of the icons was typical of the interface written in English so we changed that too. Also, we decided that the main button in the bottom menu should be the "Add" function.

• Period of stay in a tenant's apartment - many testified that the important detail for them is to know the length of time the tenants stayed in the apartment (from entry to exit), term of the contract - an indication that is currently missing.

How we fixed that?

Before:

After:

• Additional comments from the tenants - in addition to the tags, there is an option for tenants to enter a message in free text (limited in characters) to strengthen the feedback on the apartment. Users have testified that it is not clear whether the text is a quote or who wrote it.

How we fixed that?

Before (on the right)

After (on the left)

• Rating of the apartment - the users lacked a mirror about how much each tenant rated the apartment and even how much they rated each parameter individually (apartment owner, maintenance, around) and not just the overall rating.

How we fixed that?

After clicking on the star at the top of the screen, a pop-up will open containing the data:

• Conclusion - Many users testified that they lacked a "bottom line", detailed information that would justify or disqualify the choice of apartment based on the given information. That is, after reading the information they are interested in getting an intention or summary of what has been said so far, in a simplicity that will help them make the right decision for them.

** This conclusion is based on the number of tags marked positive and the number of tags marked negative by the tenant

Overall view of the screen design