Discuss is a B2B market research platform, where users run projects to learn about market trends and customer behavior. Research projects typically involve conducting video interviews and then analyzing the recordings with insights tools—all done within the platform.
Users with other means of collecting research can still use Discuss by uploading off-platform video files into their projects. However, this feature had been underutilized since its launch, as there were several limitations that impaired its usability.
A recent spike in customer interest for off-platform uploads meant it was time for us to fix these problems. I led the redesign of the upload feature and flow, adapting it to accommodate bulk uploads and fixing several UX issues that I identified.
Lead Designer - UX/UI Design, User Flows, Wireframes, Prototypes
Bryan Kai, SWE
Jilleun Eglin, PM
3 months, launched Aug 2024
Up until recently, uploading off-platform recordings on Discuss garnered minimal interest and usage. This all changed after we released Genie Summaries, a Gen-AI tool that can create a text-based summary of any interview recording or group of recordings within a project. What used to take researchers days to extract insights from a set of recordings could now be accomplished in minutes.
As a result, interest in off-platform uploads surged. Several clients reached out about starting projects that exclusively contained off-platform research for use with Genie. One client even planned on uploading and summarizing "hundreds of hours" of video content once it became feasible to do so.
If we wanted to capitalize on the demand for summarizing off-platform research, we had some work to do.
As it stood, our current video upload feature was incompatible with the Genie workflow that our customers wanted. It was originally built as an MVP and centered around two technical requirements that were now major bottlenecks...
One file at a time. Users aren't allowed to select multiple files in the file picker and instead must upload them one-by-one.
Strict filetype requirement. Only .mp4 video files can be uploaded into our platform.
I began this project before all of its requirements were officially defined, with the understanding that additional ones would be provided later by the Product Manager. The only requirement I had at the beginning was that the new upload flow must support multiple files per upload.
To kick off my design process, I performed an informal heuristic evaluation of the existing upload flow using Nielsen Norman's 10 usability heuristics. During this evaluation, I identified three primary heuristics where our current flow fell short and used those to guide my design decisions throughout the project. These three heuristics were...
"Minimize the user's memory load by making elements, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the interface to another."
To begin a file upload, users must first click on the Insights top nav and then the Recordings sub nav (Steps 1 and 2 below). Next, they must expand the Tools & Downloads dropdown (Step 3) and select the upload option (Step 4). The buried placement of this entry point forces users to search for it and harms feature discoverability for new users.
"Shortcuts — hidden from novice users — may speed up the interaction for the expert user so that the design can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users."
Not only are users forced to start uploads from the Recordings page, they also must specify the language of the file before it can be uploaded. The amount of clicks this requires makes for a tedious experience. At minimum, it takes 9 clicks to upload a file when starting from the platform home page and 7 clicks when starting from the Recordings page.
Breakdown of clicks needed to start an upload:
"The design should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within a reasonable amount of time."
After a video file is uploaded to Discuss it must undergo post-processing before it becomes visible in the platform. Post-processing often takes more time than the initial file upload itself. However, there are no progress indicators or any mention that this is a required step. This can cause confusion for the user when their file upload is "completed" but the video is nowhere to be found and will be even more of an issue once multiple files can be uploaded at a time.
After my heuristic evaluation, I mapped out a user flow of the current upload experience. This helped me visualize where the flow could be tweaked to incorporate bulk uploads and improve usability as well as which steps must be carried over.
I then mapped out alternative user flows. I started with an "ideal upload flow," meant to be my vision of the shortest and simplest possible way of uploading files. Because the ideal flow relied on two technical assumptions that I hadn't yet confirmed with the Engineer Lead, I also explored additional flows without those assumptions.
This ideal flow was created under two major technical assumptions:
Because these assumptions hadn't yet been confirmed with the Engineer Lead, I also explored additional flows independent of these assumptions.
At this point, I began exploring designs for my proposed ideal flow (while also fleshing out some of the alternative flows on the side). My first iteration of designs focused on:
After receiving feedback from the Product team during a design critique, my next iterations revolved around:
I also explored alternate designs of the file upload status cards that included progress steppers, as I thought that informing users of all the steps involved up front would be helpful. In the end, I opted for a plainer design with no stepper as this design choice was based on a hunch and adding one would introduce more complexity for the engineers.
At this point, I formally met with the Lead Engineer to discuss my designs and their feasibility in depth. This conversation was insightful and revealed several things contrary to my initial design assumptions:
I worked with him to revise my designs so that they adhered to technical constraints and minimized engineering debt, while still delivering the optimal user experience that I envisioned.
My final iterations resulted in:
By identifying and targeting usability issues that the existing flow fell short of, I delivered a new upload experience that improved upon efficiency, visibility, and more.
Reduced total # of clicks needed to upload a file by 60%. From 9 clicks down to 3 clicks.
Improved feature discoverability and ease of access by adding a second upload flow entry point on the Overview page
Enhanced system visibility by adding banners, toasts, and placeholders to communicate file upload progress
Although I left the company before I could see my designs implemented and their impact on users firsthand, a former colleague was kind enough to share the following metrics that were collected 1 month after launch.
137% increase in off-platform videos uploaded
47% increase in new projects with uploads
Further analysis of these metrics, including a comparison between customers with Genie subscriptions vs. customers without Genie subscriptions, could be beneficial in illustrating the impact of my redesigned upload flow without the influence of Genie.
This project was unique for me in that I worked alongside an assigned Engineer Lead for its entirety. In past projects, designers would send any questions or requests in the #dev Slack channel and whoever had time or expertise would assist. Having a dedicated engineering perspective to help guide my design decisions was invaluable. However, this project was not without its hiccups.
Due to differing schedules and priorities, the Engineer Lead wasn't able to build a proof-of-concept (PoC) to validate my initial design proposals until after I had already done several rounds of iterations. After the PoC was presented, I discovered several aspects of my designs that were either unfeasible or were based on incorrect technical assumptions.
Despite this, I had prepared several alternative designs in the event that my favored design solution did not pan out. I reviewed these designs with the Engineer Lead and together we chose the optimal workaround. I was then able to confidently deliver an improved final solution that met our design, technical, and business requirements.
This new upload flow would not have been possible, or would have at least taken much longer to produce, had I not been able to work so closely with an Engineer Lead. I look forward to future projects where I have the privilege of designing with and learning from developers, and am excited to see what we can accomplish.