UNMODERATED TESTING · ITERATIVE RESEARCH · B2B SAAS BANKING PLATFORM · CRAFT

When design changes aren't enough

The client wanted a visual refresh. Two rounds of unmoderated testing revealed why surface-level changes could only go so far and gave a new VP the evidence she needed to push for something bigger.

MY ROLE

Lead researcher

TIMELINE

~24 across two rounds

METHODS

Unmoderated usability testing, design system audit, internal user interviews

CONTEXT

Ongoing retainer,

in progress

THE CHALLENGE

Our client wanted a visual refresh. They had a long-tenured stakeholder with a clear vision for what the product needed, and it was largely aesthetic. Our design team could see deeper issues — workflow friction, structural inconsistencies, problems that a reskin wouldn't resolve — but with a hands-on, change-resistant stakeholder, there hadn't been an opening to raise it directly.

THE PLAN

I proposed unmoderated usability testing. The product section in question — profile options within the software — wasn't something users interacted with frequently, which made scheduling moderated sessions impractical and incentive costs prohibitive. Unmoderated testing let us observe actual behavior rather than recalled behavior, and reach more participants within the budget and timeline.

ROUND ONE

Round one revealed a clear split: one area tested well, several others performed poorly. I flagged the possibility that the underperforming areas pointed to something structural, while also recommending specific design changes the team could act on immediately. The client agreed to revisions and a second round.

Frame 18_edited_edited_edited_edited.png

ROUND TWO

In round two, some areas that had received design attention improved. But those underperforming areas stayed the same, even after design revisions. That pattern highlighted that design updates could move the needle on specific touchpoints, but they couldn't resolve the underlying experience.

THE OUTCOME

A new VP had recently joined the organization and was already trying to shift the team's mindset toward more meaningful product investment. Our research gave her something concrete to stand behind. The engagement expanded to include a design system audit and internal user interviews, and the scope of what was possible grew from there.

REFLECTION

This project is a good example of research doing its work indirectly. We didn't convince the resistant stakeholder directly, but we did generate evidence that empowered someone else to have that conversation. Sometimes the most important thing research does is give the right person something to stand behind.