Identifying Significant Roadblocks to New Product Adoption

Why research mattered

Experian planned to launch a vehicle marketplace, an all-in-one car buying experience for its users. I joined after conversations with the Marketplace UX design manager and the Emerging Verticals product manager.

The team expected the MVP to be light on features. What they initially wanted to learn was how users would feel about Experian offering a vehicle marketplace in general. The stakes were product and development work planned across numerous sprints.

Research approach

I had already tested the idea as a concept with unmoderated methods. Once a prototype existed, I moved to moderated usability testing, so I could ask follow-up questions about the whole experience and the value proposition as users reacted.

• Participants. Ten Experian users, five per round, all planning to buy a vehicle within a year, since they were already in or close to the purchasing decision.
• Scope. Two rounds, so the second could test what the first taught us. Round one tested the MVP prototype as the team planned to ship it, without a vehicle details page.
• Tradeoff. A light first version meant the prototype was missing things users expected. That was useful to learn, but it meant round one couldn't answer the value question on its own.

Key findings

1. A missing details page broke basic expectations

Users expected a page for each vehicle and were surprised not to find one. They called it table stakes for any vehicle marketplace and said they would quickly leave for a competitor that gave them timely, thorough information.

2. “Request info” was slow, and the SSN request came too early

The only way to learn more was a button that sent users' details to a dealership. Waiting for a dealership to contact them felt slow and confusing, and many didn't understand why they were asked to confirm sensitive information, like their SSN, before they had a chance to even read about a car.

3. With the page added, personalization still fell short

Round two met the details-page expectations. A bigger gap showed up: users expected Experian to use its knowledge of their credit and financing to help them choose a car, and the tested designs only let them send their information to a dealership.

4. Financing was the expected differentiator

Users trust Experian as the custodian of their credit and financial data, and car financing can be a cumbersome process. They wanted far more than a lead generation tool for dealerships, and without it they saw little reason to use the marketplace over any other car site.

Influence and outcomes

Delivering this news took preparation. I gave my UX design manager a heads-up before sharing bad news, so he came into the meeting prepared. I used video clips so stakeholders could hear the frustration, hesitation, and concern in users' voices. There was very little pushback. The response was closer to “yeah, these are good points that we aren't considering,” and it raised a question the team hadn't worked through: what would make this marketplace different from any other?

• What I delivered: a report and video clips after each round.
• What was implemented: after round one, the team paused the MVP release until a vehicle details page was in place, but ultimately, nothing was implemented.
• What was measured: no metric. Within two weeks of the round two readout, leadership de-prioritized the Vehicle Marketplace and cancelled product and development work planned across numerous sprints. I believe the research helped drive that decision, though other factors were also at play. I don't have a dollar figure, but the cancellation likely saved months of development time and effort.

Reflection

What I learned. A team focused on getting a first version to market can miss the question underneath it. Showing them where users saw no difference from other sites was more useful than a list of usability issues.

What I'd do differently. I'd work with my UX designer to mock up a version that matched what users told us they wanted. Not to take ownership of the product, but to show what might be possible if Experian used its access to credit data. Telling a team what doesn't work is useful. Showing a direction worth exploring would have given them somewhere to go.

What remained unresolved. The credit-informed financing direction users described was never tested, because it was a much larger lift in product scope.

Appendix: methods and supporting detail

The full method notes and the rest of the findings, for a deeper read.