Wanderlust Airlines - Case Study
Case Study for my Professional Diploma Project
Overview
Challenge: To improve the online flight booking experience by addressing user pain points uncovered through research and testing.
Role: UX researcher and designer
Tools: Miro, Figma, Google Forms and Sheets, Zoom
Limitations: Time and using a free Figma account (limits on Interactions)
Research
The research I undertook included:
🔸 Competitive benchmarking, comparing 4 similar sites
- Examine each step of the booking process, from the homepage to the booking summary.
- Gain an overview of the best practices to adopt and those to avoid.
- Understand the experience and opinions of different users when using airline sites.
- Deep dive into a user’s experience to gain concrete understanding of each step of the experience in the customer journey.
Analysis and Conclusions
The competitive benchmarking research provided insights into the conventions of existing airline sites. I included a train reservation site in the study, to provides insights into a travel-related ticketing service from a different perspective. The research provided insights into which elements were valuable to replicate and those areas to improve for a better user experience.
To analyse the unstructured data collected from all the research methods, I collaborated with another UX student to create an Affinity diagram. We combined the research we had both obtained, providing even more results and better insights.
The Affinity diagram assisted us the with analysis and provided us with the necessary insights to make design decisions later in the UX process.
We created a board with all our notes, then arranged, and rearranged, the notes into groups that we noticed emerging.
The main conclusions we came to were:
- Having both outbound and inbound flights on the same page was confusing.
- Both of those two pages should be clearly titled.
- Lack of clarity in fare options was a common pain point.
- A common user feeling was a mistrust of upsells and add-ons.
- They also showed a repeated desire for more transparency and linear booking steps.
Concept development
Customer Journey map
From the Affinity diagram, I was able to create a Customer journey map; noting the goals, behaviours and mental models of a customer buying airline tickets.
The customer journey map helped to note the main positive experiences and pain points the users had. Again, this reinforced the conclusion in the analysis phase, that the flight and fare selection process were the main pain points in the journey.
Since upsells and add-ons are an important part of business goals, the process can not be simply removed, but it could be improved.
The customer journey map also helped clarify the flow which would become the process to follow in the following steps.
Designing the User flow and interactions
Progressing from the journey map, the next step was to map the screen flow so as to define a clear structure and information architecture for the site.
Progressing from the journey map, the next step was to map the screen flow so as to define a clear structure and information architecture for the site.
Through this step I understood the user flow better, but where the lightbulb moment came was when I was sketching the wireframes. Sketching the screens and designing the interactions was key to understanding how I was going to resolve the challenge of improving the experience in relation to add-ons.
Why not move the luggage add-on into the fares modal?
To quote some of the users from the research:
“To see all of the costs upfront!!”
“I would like more transparency about offers and process of booking ordinary tickets from the start.”
This solution would give a more accurate fare summary before proceeding to further add-on screens, like seat selection. This would provide users with an improved sense of transparency and make them click through less screens, meaning they are more likely to continue on their journey through to payment.
Another pain-point solution came from knowing that many users often research flights before buying. I moved the account creation step to a later stage in the journey.
The strategy was to increase trust by making the process feel less pushy and allow users to see the real total trip price before deciding.
To further iterate this point, I also introduced a “Speedy check-out” option for users who don’t want to pay for seats, letting them skip directly to payment. The intention with this was to streamline the flow, reduce clicks, and lower basket abandonment while still allowing post-payment seat upgrades.
To align with business goals, the CTA hierarchy prioritised seat purchases, giving the “Speedy check-out” button lower visual weight.
Design
Prototype & Wireframes
After having designed the user flow and screen states, I moved on to creating the mid-fidelity prototype. I received feedback from a faculty member and further improved the hierarchy with the “Speedy check-out” payment CTAs. I also adjusted as much of the design as I could to be accessible (although only having learnt some basics on the course).
I then tested out the prototype with the same user from the in-depth interview in the research stage.
The user commented that:
“Being able to choose the luggage options at the same time as the flight made it all [the process] seem shorter, faster.”
Handover documentation
After completion, I included information about button states, interactions, rules, and any in-depth notes relating to the design, aimed at a smooth handover to the developers.
Conclusion and Reflection
The main challenges exposed in the research were addressed:
- Simplified booking flow with grouped fare and luggage options
- Improved user trust with transparent pricing, resulting in a faster flow to payment