Ongoing User Research

Round 6 (May 2020)

The research plan and the conversation guide can be found below.

Interview Script Usability Testing May 2020 (1).docx

---

Round 5 (April 2020)

What we tested

Prototype

• How do users react to displayed strategies based on the inputed transactions? What actions do they take based on the strategies displayed? Does this functionality match the user expectations?
• What do the users go to reset all of the data? Does this functionality match the user expectations?

Experiences to test

• Fix-it Strategies
• Reset/More

Findings

• Liked 'fix-it' called out. Got users attention. Some users expected that clicking on the button will fix automatically fix their calendar and make it green.
• Fix-it logic was easy to understand and implement. Users expected the strategies they implemented to be appropriately updated.
• Liked before reseting the data, the tool asked was second confirmation. Content was confusing.
• Wanted a to undo a recent update based on strategy
• Wanted to compare before and after strategy implemented. Color change was good but wanted to see the difference in the actual amount.

Recommendations

• Build out the strategies logic such it tracks the user appropriately updates the fix it (could be out of MVP scope)
  • Housing strategy seeks user confirmation to split the amount, add another occurrence automatically, deletes the existing occurrence
  • Adjusting strategy seeks user confirmation to modify the amount and update the transactions appropriately
  • Utilities strategies send reminders if no user action is confirmed

---

Round 4 (March 2020)

What we tested

Prototype

• Do users understand how transactions are grouped? Do the users understand how categories are mapped - main and sub? What do users think about 'other' category?
• What do users think about the strategies? Do they understand how they are created?
• Can users easily navigate users navigate between the different part of the tools? Is the behavior in line with what they expect?

Experiences to test

• New way to add transactions
• Strategies tied to input
• Bottom Navigation

Findings

• Liked everything being visible right upfront. The toggle between income and expense category was helpful in separating the two. They knew what type of transaction they were entering at any given type.
• Had no issues adding, editing, or deleting transactions
• Wanted to select multiple transactions to delete
• Did not find the strategies to be personalized
• Hard to add all transactions at once

Recommendations

• Can potentially look at deleting multiple transaction at the same time (could be out of scope for MVP)
• Personalize strategies not only based on type of input but also based on the amount
• Liked the navigation was consistent throughout the different screens and at the bottom. Increased accessibility.

---

Round 3 (Feb 2020)

What we tested

Prototype

• How do users react to the new landing page? Do they feel the need to login? Do they understand this tool will offer them personalized strategies to improve their finances?
• What do the users understand from the transactions summary list? It is clear how it is listed? Can users differentiate between income and expense transactions?
• Do the users understand how the transactions are shown in the calendar?
• Do users understand why calendar shows different colors? How does it make them feel? What do users want to do with the color coded calendar?

Experiences to test

• New Landing Page
• Calendar View

Findings

• Landing page set expectations. 'Okay to estimate' made users feel as ease. There was not too much content to read before proceeding into the tool
• The monthly view shown is not beneficial to users. Users are unable to look at their situation as a whole month
• Not clear how transactions are prioritized. Users understood the transactions to be separate by type but got confused with date especially since calendar was right there.
• Red color made users anxious. They wanted to do something to make it green. They felt like they were doing something wrong.
• Was not clear how users would update the transactions.

Recommendations

• Show week-view within month view to show how the money flows throughout the week and when a user ends up in negative.
• Show which transaction causes the user to go in red.
• Prioritize transactions for users by date
• Show what users can do to get more green in the calendar

---

Round 2 (January 2020)

What we tested

Prototype Testing

• What value do users perceive when they see the landing page? What do they think the tool has to offer?
• What do the users understand the graphics, icons, and layout? Was anything confusing or difficult to understand?
• Does anything grab their attention? Why? Was there anything they liked or disliked?
• Are the instructions/tool tips/headings clear? Do they communicate what is expected from the user?
• Do the user find adding income and expenses intuitive? Does the functionality match user expectations? Can they easily add, edit, and delete the transactions?

Experiences to test

• Landing Page
• Adding Transactions

Findings

• Landing page
  • Instructions were not clear. Did not know whether the tool will generate strategies that will assist with better managing their week-to-week money.
  • Appeared like a user will be asked to login. This was quite off-putting
• Adding Transactions
  • Hard to estimate starting balance will be in the future. Can accurately know of what in the moment in time the starting balance is
  • Page becomes longer and there is too much to scroll through if too many options are selected
  • Progress unclear and not clear which step user is on.
  • List of transactions was confusing and was a long. Scrolling within scrolling was hard to understand.
  • Accordion was quite confusing. Users kept getting lost.

Recommendations

• Starting balance should start and be added to the day user enters/launches the tool. Starting balance can be edit in the calendar view.
• Breakdown input of options into separate screens to make it more mobile friendly
• Set user expectation with pagination (CFPB design system)
• Look at alternative ways to show parent and child income and expense category

---

Round 1 (December 2019)

What we tested

Prototype Testing

• How do users go about planning the week or month? What activities, budget, or tools do they use to think about the money they have and where they would want to spend it?
• Do users want to a progressive linear approach to build out the calendar?
  • What activities need to be broken down?
  • Whether users will want to move through the tool in a fixed order?
  • Will the users want to go back and fix their responses
• Do users want to be shown information all at once? What activities will the user be prompted to do?
• What do users do they don't not know a response to question at the time of using the tool?

Content Testing

• What does cash flow mean to the users?
• How do they think of the different categories of transactions?

Findings:

• Some users found linear fixed approach overly restrictive. They also stated the progressive approach was helpful in some areas where they usually overlook (e.g., infrequent transactions) and may enter incorrect information or found it overwhelming and hard to input the details
• Some users stated that seeing an empty calendar was not helpful and they did not understand what to do next.
• Some users stated that not seeing personalized results and how they could improve their cash flow was
• Majority of the users did not understand what was meant by cash flow and found 'other' confusing.

Recommendations

• For a new user, use a hybrid approach - where hard part is based on a linear approach and moves users in a fixed order throughout the tool
• For a returning user, use all at once approach where the users' are free to choose and move through the tool in any order
• Changing the name of the tool from cash flow to something that ties to a calendar
• Define what 'Other' meant for different transactions