Back to Home


TELUS Bundle Builder

TELUS is one of Canada’s largest telecommunications companies. We helped them redesign their TV + Internet bundle builder to become more frictionless and tailored to each customer’s needs, while solving critical trust issues that customers had.


Lead UX Design, Design Strategy, Design Process facilitation, Rapid Prototyping

May - August 2017

Master of Digital Media Industry Project @ Centre For Digital Media for TELUS Digital


Final Product




The Brief
How can we help Telus’ new customers purchase an affordable bundle that meets their needs without enduring a tedious, unintuitive and untailored customer experience?

User Research

Goals
  • Find out users’ preferences when they buy bundles online
  • Find out how users measure their needs
  • Find gaps in the experience and pain points

Method
  • Comparison test & Qualitative Interview: Telus vs. Bell
  • 6 users, across various age groups

What we found



“I speak with my wife about what we actually watch or want to watch, then list those channels.”

“You spend some time reading online, but there are too many choices. It’s complicated and confusing.”

“My god, so complicated, why can't you pick the channel you want?”


  • Users are intimidated by the choices available to them
  • Many users started off with measuring their TV channel needs
  • Users were frustrated that they could not choose specific channels
  • Search functionality within the purchasing experience is critical to user’s e-commerce experiences
  • Cross-channel experience is paramount

Ideation

Rapid Prototyping

In order to put our ideas onto paper, we created  wireframes from our whiteboarded ideas and did some user testing in the form of a cognitive walkthrough. 

We initially thought a chatbot would work well as part of the redesign, but users felt that chatbots were annoying and cumbersome. They prioritized customization of bundles and easy comparisons above all.


Prioritization

After we felt like we had more or less a complete concept, we wanted to gauge what to build first.

To do this, we assigned priority values to each feature and compared value-to-users vs. effort in the form of a feature matrix.

The features that seemed to have the highest value to users that were the filtering + recommendations (which most users wanted for maximum flexibility and customization)

We deemed a conversational UI to be important as it could help users understand better the choices that they can make as well as help guide the users through the experience.

Easily being able to compare their choices would also be paramount.
Designing inputs & outputs


We listed out the factors that determine the user’s needs, such as what TV channels they may watch, or what kind of activities they do while using the internet. E.g. streaming, or online gaming.

This set up the foundation for the design team to work on the form that these inputs would take, and the developers and product owner working on the algorithm behind that system to make sure that the math makes sense.



Conversational Interface

We learned from our user research that users prefer not to interact with a chatbot. They didn’t trust that a bot would understand them, and just wanted to quickly filter through the options. After we got the inputs & outputs right, we prototyped the conversational interface aspect. 


The conversational interface as seen on the left of each screen. We designed it to be an assistive wayfinding tool rather than being central to the experience.



Key takeaways from lo-fi prototyping

  • Users did not grasp the relationship between a bundle, themepack and a channel. They did not understand that they could only select theme packs and not specific channels
  • Users wanted to see descriptions of each channel
  • Clear and consistent pricing is key to forming trust with the brand


Mid-fidelity prototyping


Interactive mid-fi prototype made with InVision

Testing our prototype with real users out in the wild.

We had a few interesting key takeaways from our mid-fi prototyping.  Users vastly preferred the a la carte process and liked the idea of picking their own channels. They also welcomed the idea of using sliders to estimate their internet needs.

However, their main issues were with regards to discerning between bundles, theme packs and channels. This very much seemed to be the elephant in the room. They also voiced out that they had problems trusting the language used.



Solving the elephant in the room

In order to solve the issue of discerning between bundles, theme packs and channels, we created an onboarding slideshow that explains the distinctions between the terms. A tabbed structure provides clear separation between our recommendations, theme packs and channels. Our recommendations are highlighted, but can be deselected. The copy within the app was rewritten to provide for a sense of being in control.


Solving trust & language


We came up with a new model of solving for trust in our design. These principles pertain to both interface and language. Here, users are clearly onboarded to the distinctions between theme packs, channels and essentials so they feel like they are making a more informed choice.

Future plans & cross-channel experience



Welcome screen for existing customers


Mobile flow



My learnings

TELUS is a big and influential company with lots of products and choices for customers. The biggest challenge in this project was matching the user needs to the business needs. Figuring out how to think at scale in terms of design was definitely a challenge, as the gamut of users our product needed to work for is really really wide.

On a personal level, I had to make sure that we were facilitating the design workshops to meet  the needs of stakeholders and users. We went through 8 or 9 rounds of lo-fi prototyping, which definitely proved to be helpful, but at the same time gruelling for the design team who were all extremely eager to scale up in fidelity. 

Taking out our product to users in the public revealed results that were surprising and greatly informed our decision making process. This was also highly valued by our client in our final presentations.

The most challenging part of building products at scale is that the work never ends. It needs to optimised on both a design and performance level, and we spent ~3 months on this prototype. We would probably need much longer to test the MVP version of this and get real insights through analytics.