← BACK TO ALL PROJECTS

MITCHELL CONNECT

Mitchell International provides software for hundreds of thousands of auto body repair shops around the world. While at Mitchell, I helped launch Mitchell Connect, a web app used by auto body shops to communicate with insurance carriers.

Role | User Experience Researcher, Client | Mitchell International

CONTEXTUAL INQUIRY

Contextual Inquiry involves interviewing and observing users in their usual environment. This is one of my favorite methods for kick-starting a project, because it gives me an understanding of environmental factors that affect usage. My main user group was shop estimators, so I visited several auto body shops.

ENVIRONMENT

I noticed that sun glare made it difficult for users to see their screens, which told me that the interface needs to be higher contrast. I also noticed users remarking on their spotty internet connection, which inspired more offline functionality in an app.

SOCIAL SYSTEM

I noticed social factors that affected app design. For instance, it was common for several people to share one computer. This sharing aspect lead us to rethink the design of user profiles.  

BEHAVIOR & JOURNEY MAPPING

While conducting contextual inquiries, I took pictures and sketched out floor plans of the areas where my personas worked. Afterwards, I synthesized all the floor plans into a standardized plan. I also observed Sean's (the shop estimator's) workflow, including the tools he uses, the people he works with, and the pain points he encounters.

When I joined Mitchell, my UX team had already established a persona for a shop estimator, name Sean Edwards. As I conducted contextual analysis, I noticed two archetypes of shop estimators emerging. I added Sam Ewings, as a shop estimator who is new to estimating, has a high level of skill with technology, but does not have a close relationship with Mitchell. On the contrary, Sean Edwards has been around shops since he was a kid. He has a close relationship with Mitchell, because he's been using their estimating tools since before Mitchell made software. 

COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

Before designing a common feature, such as a login screen or photo editor, I like to complete a competitive analysis. This process consists of collecting screen shots, showing how others have designed and built similar features. This can be a powerful way to understand UX trends and standards, to generate ideas, and to avoid common pitfalls.

While at Mitchell, I helped develop a standardized process for user testing.

PROTOCOL

The protocol included tips on conducting user testing, standards for recruiting and compensating participants, standards for scheduling, etc. This helped keep all team members on the same page, and assured that no one reinvented the wheel.

SCRIPT

The script included a standard introduction that was meant to put the participant at ease, orient them with the project, and take care of administrative tasks, such as discussing recording practices.

IMPROVEMENT

After each research session, I took a few minutes to reflect on my performance. Did I ask a leading question? Did I give my participant enough time to respond? Did I make sure to verify my understanding of what they said? I like to keep track of what went well or not, so I can constantly improve.

PROTOTYPING

I created interactive prototypes in Axure RP which were used for both user testing and design specs. I learned to create prototypes with the right level of interactivity and detail. The goal was to communicate the design while maintaining a lean process. For user testing, I was also mindful to control variables between design iterations and to emulate real world interactions.

THE CHALLENGE

Our highest priority when launching Mitchell Connect was to assure a frictionless onboarding and first-time use experience. Unfortunately, we discovered we would need our users to install a third-party browser extension to allow for an essential feature to work within the app. A major concern was that users would become disoriented by leaving our app to download the extension.

HOW I SOLVED IT

In order to stay on budget, while creating a seamless experience, I worked with developers to generate a list of possible design solutions and ordered them from most optimal experience (which happened to coincide with most dev effort) to least optimal user experience. In order to choose the appropriate solution, I began by creating an interactive prototype of the least optimal design and conducting usability testing on it. It failed spectacularly, so I moved onto the next solution. I continued this process until the design tested well with users, and my teammates and I felt confident in our solution.