ProblemBumbleBFF has minimal users due to the platform being similar to the dating app, BumbleDate. Users felt confused as to the nature of the app as they swipe on profile pictures to choose a friend. This felt romantic rather than 'friendly' and decreased traction to the application.
SolutionDiscovering through research that the swipe was not limited to romance, we replaced the main card with an event. User swiped on events they were interested in, providing an organic opportunity to meet others. Users could also create events for friendship-making opportunities.
ResearchResearch of business model was conducted through user interviews, competitive analysis, qualitative and quantitative analysis, journey mapping, personas, user flows, heuristic evaluation, and usability testing.
My roleI worked as a UX researcher and designer, participating in all aspects of the design process including strategy, research, synthesis, usability testing, and ideation.
|
Team |
ToolsPaper, Sketch, InVision, and InVision Studio
|
Scope and Strategy
Understanding the Scope and Strategy of BumbleBFFOn their existing app, BumbleBFF took a similar approach to BumbleDate. Users are given photos of potential friends and if interested, would swipe right on their profile. This provided an introduction and if matched, users could begin chatting using the application. I began thinking about my current friends. Would I swipe right on their faces? Would they swipe right on mine?
Also, why does this feel like I’m picking a romantic partner? |
Research
User interviews: is the swipe gesture limited to romance?
We learned through testing that the interaction with the swipe gesture meant contextually yes or no to the user.
What we learned: "The check mark tells me I'm saying yes. The X tell me I'm saying no." - user interview "It's a way to get to the next thing. If the focus isn't what I want, I swipe to see what is next." - user interview "It can be associated with romance but also other things. I'm simply saying yes or no." - user interview |
How do we know if we are in the friend-zone?
Determining the swipe was not limited to romance, we needed to figure out how users identified romance and the friend-zone. This insight would help us create a platform that connects to the friend-making process.
I sent surveys and began conducting interviews based on two questions: 1. How do you make friends as an adult? 2. How do you know you are in the friend-zone and not romantic? |
Through user interviews & surveys, we learned how adults prefer to make friends.
- Group activities = Friend Zone - One-on-one = Romantic potential - Organize activities are preferred by tired, over-worked adults. - Maintaining relationships is much easier with a common interest. |
"I've attended organized events to meet friends several times. I found that groups with shared interests makes the conversations easier with a shared interest. Easy excuse to follow up." - User Interview
"Group interactions means friends. Formal one on one interactions meant a potential romance." - User Survey |
Research - Analysis of current users and research into context of use
We explored profiles of 50 women and men looking for age ranges, relationship status, and context of use for the app. This is what we learned:
#1: Relationship status was equal amongst users. Married, single, and 'did not say' were the three types of users and were equal in quantity. #2: The average age was early 30's. The average age for men was 32 and for women was 31. #3: People were using the app for a shift in life circumstances. Both women and men were experiencing changes in their lives but the circumstances behind those changes were varied. |
|
|
Competitor Analysis
My teammate, PJ Valenzuela, compared the features of two friendship-making applications: Frim and Friended. The differences he found included a group chat and live-video chat. None of these competitors involved using events as a way to target meeting friends.
Analysis
MoSCow method to determine the MVP
Synthesis of features was needed so I lead the team through the MoSCow method to narrow down the list of features. We needed to stay focused on helping our users meet new friends without overloading them with tons of features.
From our research, we learned the swipe meant approval or rejection but was not associated with romance. The swipe would be used to choose an event instead of a person. We also wanted the interests of our users to be the primary focus. |
Minimum Viable Product- Create/set-up a profile - Create new events - Find events - Chat with event attendees - Keep with Bumble branding/patterns |
|
Persona Development
When looking at the research, our users were having similar experiences for their purpose of using the application: a shift in their life. Our two personas: Joshua, the recent transplant and Sarah, the lonely new mom.
Joshua, "The Recent Transplant"
Age 32 Joshua recently relocated to Denver for a new job and loves photography. He needs a way to meet "groups with shared interests as it makes conversations comfortable and easier for follow up." Goals: - Meet like minded people - Find people to go hiking with and take photographs - Grow his circle of friends - Learn about what to do in the Denver area Pain points: - Feels awkward when meeting people in bars - Doesn't like formal ways of meeting people - Does not know anyone and wants to do activities with others |
Sarah, the "Lonely New Mother"
Age 31 Sarah is a new mom who lives with her husband and newborn. Since the birth of their child, she feels she cannot relate to her current friend group. She needs a way "to meet moms with kids of a similar age. It is so hard finding mom friends." Goals: - Meet other new moms with similar struggles - Find events that fit into her busy schedule and are kid-friendly Pain Points: - Her current friends do not have kids, therefore activities are not focused with a baby in mind - Feels lonely in her house and has minimal energy to find friends |
Each of their ideal user journeys:
Design
Work Flows
We created two user flows that targeted the features in our minimal viable product, the goals of both users, and the ideal journey maps. We included inviting features such as group chat and visibility of other attendees along the flow to prevent Joshua from not feeling engaged with the application. Due to how little time new mom Sarah may have to spend on the app, we included minimal steps on setting up an event.
Sketching to meet the needs of our personas.
Through a series of crazy eight sketching, we analyzed how the card for finding an event would support the busy lives of Joshua and Sarah. Users needed clear information and natural heuristics to guide them. They can scroll down for more info and swipe right or left on the events. When the event is chosen, two joining circles would appear: the user's pic and the event.
When setting up a profile, we kept Sarah's busy lifestyle in mind, modifying features for minimal photos to upload, 4-5 questions to answer, and larger icons to choose from for interests, speeding up the process. Creating an event card provides a skeleton view of the event, icons for clarity, and the ability to preview before saving. |
Low and Mid Fidelity Wireframes
All wireframes were created by my teammate Jake Cummings.
Evolution of the Event Card: paper - high fidelity
How to swipe on an event: High Fidelity
Evaluate
Design iteration from task analysis and usability tests.
We gave our users the same three tasks and observed, asking them to talk aloud as they walked through the flows.
User tasks:
1. Create a profile.
2. Find a hiking event, sign up, and talk to others in the event.
3. Create an event for moms who want to get together over coffee.
1. Create a profile.
2. Find a hiking event, sign up, and talk to others in the event.
3. Create an event for moms who want to get together over coffee.
Users needed prompting to understand how to choose an event:
Our users didn't realize they needed to swipe left or right to choose an event, unless we explained it to them. We solved this by adding an on-boarding screen with directional arrows, visuals on how to swipe, and how to explore more. We noticed on the second round of testing that all users were able to independently operate the app. |
"I'm not seeing how to talk to others."
When users swiped on an event, they were greeted with a confirmation page. Our goal was that they would invite others to the event and chat with those already going. Our usability tests proved otherwise. Users did not see the Join Group Chat so we modified this action through additional white space, modifications of font color in the Invite Friends button, and an arrow below Join Group Chat. |
"Where do I click first?"
From our first round of usability testing, the user from was pausing on this card because Repeat Event and New Event where designed within the same pill. We modified this by removing the pill button from Repeat Event and used only the words as a link, placed below New. The result: users found New easily without interrupting the flow. |
Outcomes and Results
Through this process of learning how users prefer to make friends, we concluded that technology could support this need by using events as the best way for organic interactions. We learned through testing that the interaction with the swipe gesture meant contextually yes or no to the user, therefore we kept this touch gesture. With event as the main attraction, engagement rates increased by 60% and within our testing, 45% of users wanted to create an event using this application.
Even developers need friends.One of our interviewees was a web-developer who took a strong interest in the product and reached out to see if I would want to collaborate. I said yes. Working with a developer deepened my understanding on how to communicate my designs from Sketch into code and meet her needs. I used Zeplin to transfer the designs and Sandra and I spent a lot of time with each other confirming decisions. She collaborated about the flow of the app, pointing out missing pieces, therefore I modified some original cards and included a few more to streamline the flow of the application.
|