Win loss for the masses: Improving our feedback channels
Clozd collects and processes feedback to help companies know why they win or loose deals. Surveys are one of many feedback channels used to increase outreach and collect data. This project had the goal of enriching and modernizing the survey experience in the platform to improve participation in win-loss analysis.
MY ROLE
Designer and manager
I not only designed the solution, but was able to help bring the team together, determined our start and stop points, and clearly defined our outcomes as an interim PM.
The Problem
Problem #1 - The current survey experience was limited
It was originally introduced as a holdover for a more permanent solution to qualify the idea of using surveys to collect feedback on deals.
Problem #2 - It was outdated
The survey configuration experience didn’t meet modern design standards and was clunky.
Problem #3 - It had poor usability
The configuration was a modal window that was constricting and didn’t allow for full customizability. Adding a lot of custom questions made the modal scrollable (yikes!). The survey taking experience was a cascading page of questions that made it difficult for customers to think cohesively over all the questions and it made for long surveys.
Problem #4 - Participation was low
We were seeing 2-3% on our survey campaigns. Through general usability research we were able to quickly identify the problem: surveys were confusing and hard to take. They didn’t offer the flexibility needed to be successful. Surveys were being abandoned at an alarming rate.
The Challenge
Design
IMPACT
What were the results?
~150% increase in participation
One of the first steps into purely consumer-grade SaaS software (from a services only company to a platform company)
35% more surveys created in the platform
Better overall experience
Increased volume of feedback sample size (I don’t have the exact number but it’s based on the increase of surveys created)
Quality feedback from users on improvements to surveys
Initial step into CX and quantitative analysis
RETROSPECTIVE
What I learned
Work towards an objective and make sure everyone on the team is bought in
Everyone on the team needs to know what the target is and why. Establishing this early on alleviates a lot of confusion and keeps the team moving forward. When we did get stuck, we could come back to why we are doing the work and determine if we were off course.
Escalate problems and changes sooner
Stakeholders don’t like surprises. When things change, it’s important to let all parties know ahead of time. I’ve found that skip level communication is important and all stakeholders should know from the team when changes are made. Relying on the telephone effect to communicate is a bad strategy. If you have something pressing or compelling to tell others, do it yourself.
Start shaping sooner and involve the team
Nobody likes to be told what to do. This lends to the first lesson learned. Everyone has to bought into the work at hand. Start to shape a solution and ask for others knowledge and expertise in the matter. Team members will surprise you and will often help you see gaps.
Hofstadter’s Law - Things always take long thank you think
Estimation is hard. It’s difficult to get it right. We get excited about work and often times don’t slow down to understand the real volume of planned work. Even with strong estimates and engineering docs, the work can go over. Things will happen that you can’t necessarily plan for. It’s important to plan some overflow when those happen.
© Ryan Comte 2024