Verizon Mobile Protect
Verizon Mobile Protect
UX/UI Design
Case Study
The problem
The problem
One of the last steps before final checkout is adding device protection. Compared to in-person retail, attach rates for online protection were low (about 4% compared to nearly 20% in-store). Reports from Verizon's in-house UX research team showed that the online purchase flows lacked the context, true costs and the relatable, personal stories that in-person sales reps were able to convey. We needed a solution that provided customers with immediate, quantifiable clarity on what is covered and the true out-of-pocket costs to overcome what was perceived as an expensive add-on.
One of the last steps before final checkout is adding device protection. Compared to in-person retail, attach rates for online protection were low (about 4% compared to nearly 20% in-store). Reports from Verizon's in-house UX research team showed that the online purchase flows lacked the context, true costs and the relatable, personal stories that in-person sales reps were able to convey. We needed a solution that provided customers with immediate, quantifiable clarity on what is covered and the true out-of-pocket costs to overcome what was perceived as an expensive add-on.
Existing experience
Existing experience
Existing designs for the Verizon Mobile Protect tile relied on dense paragraphs of text and difficult to scan information. True costs were hidden or not shown at all. Research showed that customers were more likely to make a decision to add protection if they knew for certain what these costs would be. Many times the page was quickly skipped in order to complete the checkout process.
Existing designs for the Verizon Mobile Protect tile relied on dense paragraphs of text and difficult to scan information. True costs were hidden or not shown at all. Research showed that customers were more likely to make a decision to add protection if they knew for certain what these costs would be. Many times the page was quickly skipped in order to complete the checkout process.
Existing designs for both mobile and desktop
Initial concepts
Initial concepts
When the project was launched, in-depth UX research was still being conducted. Initially we focused on highlighting key features, believing that they would resonate most with customers. Concepts that incorporated photography, badging, and comparison charts were all explored.
When the project was launched, in-depth UX research was still being conducted. Initially we focused on highlighting key features, believing that they would resonate most with customers. Concepts that incorporated photography, badging, and comparison charts were all explored.
Initial concepts
Proposed design
Proposed design
Finalized research showed that is was the true costs and potential out-of-pocket expenses that resonated most with customers, not simply showing a list of the included features. Customers wanted to know if X happens, it will cost me $XX. It was decided that a chart showing the costs with and without coverage, in the most likely scenarios, would be the solution to focus on.
Finalized research showed that is was the true costs and potential out-of-pocket expenses that resonated most with customers, not simply showing a list of the included features. Customers wanted to know if X happens, it will cost me $XX. It was decided that a chart showing the costs with and without coverage, in the most likely scenarios, would be the solution to focus on.
Several rounds of chart iterations
After several rounds of feedback and iteration, both internally and with our external partners, a finalized comparison chart was chosen. Considerations were made on how to best show the information. Red highlighting was thought to look too severe and imply negative, higher costs. Using green, while signifying savings, could be misinterpreted as being discounts on a customers final bill.
After several rounds of feedback and iteration, both internally and with our external partners, a finalized comparison chart was chosen. Considerations were made on how to best show the information. Red highlighting was thought to look too severe and imply negative, higher costs. Using green, while signifying savings, could be misinterpreted as being discounts on a customers final bill.
Final comparison chart designs for mobile and desktop
Testing & impact
Testing & impact
Initial estimates projected a 2–3% increase in attach rate with updated designs. In order to test the effectiveness of the proposed design, A/B testing was conducted. Fifty percent of customers would be shown the new designs and fifty percent the existing as a control.
Initial estimates projected a 2–3% increase in attach rate with updated designs. In order to test the effectiveness of the proposed design, A/B testing was conducted. Fifty percent of customers would be shown the new designs and fifty percent the existing as a control.
After a two-week test period, results showed a 7.6% increase in attach rate translating to a projected $3.18 million in annualized revenue. Exceeding the predicted increase, the new design was recommended to be scaled to 100% for all users immediately following testing.
After a two-week test period, results showed a 7.6% increase in attach rate translating to a projected $3.18 million in annualized revenue. Exceeding the predicted increase, the new design was recommended to be scaled to 100% for all users immediately following testing.
Finalized designs
