A journey across website and branch
Personas, user tasks and the customer journey connected online research, calls, branch visits, purchase and fitting.
Helping customers choose tyres with confidence
From collaborative customer research, I created possible flows and a feature list for JAX Tyres’ desktop and mobile booking experience. In the MVP workshop, we agreed the flows and features to take into prototyping and user testing.
- With
- UX research specialist, Head of design, Technical lead and JAX stakeholders
- When
- Delivered 2017-2018
- For
- JAX Tyres customers
Customer journey
Research synthesis
Agreed user flow
MVP workshop outcome
Results
An agreed direction for prototyping and testing
A flexible booking flow
Vehicle, tyre-size and branch information could be supplied in different sequences. The agreed flow guided prototyping.
A practical feature scope
The workshop prioritised features against value and technical effort, while considering JAX’s capacity to populate content and manage services.
01 · Business problem & evidence
The challenge started before checkout
JAX wanted to grow online sales, build trust and bring better-informed customers into its branches. The design challenge was understanding what customers needed before they felt ready to choose.
Who it served
JAX Tyres customers choosing tyres and arranging fitting, through the website and branches.
At the start of the project, JAX’s understanding of its customers came from experience and assumptions rather than prior user research. We needed evidence before defining customer types and their needs.
What wasn’t working
A difficult online booking experience
Earlier testing of the existing website had identified difficulties with buying tyres and booking fitting.
Information still needed a call
The stakeholder workshop identified customers contacting stores to confirm information that should have been clear on the website.
Research goal
Understand how customers choose tyres and arrange fitting, what information they need, and why they call or visit a branch. Use that evidence to shape personas, customer journeys and a prioritised direction for prototyping.
02 · Decisions & findings
From customer evidence to an agreed MVP direction
We gathered qualitative and quantitative evidence, synthesised it into a shared customer model, then used it to explore features and booking flows before agreeing the MVP direction.
How we worked
Research & discovery
We started with JAX’s customer knowledge to form initial hypotheses and proto-personas. Phone interviews explored customer behaviour in depth, then a follow-up survey examined the emerging themes across more respondents.
Synthesis & customer understanding
Working with an external UX research specialist, I contributed to analysis and synthesis. We developed behavioural personas, user tasks and a customer journey to make differences in customer knowledge, confidence and service preferences useful to the design team.
Feature & flow exploration
I used the findings to explore feature and content ideas, then mapped possible user flows. These helped us examine different starting points and make the vehicle, tyre-size and branch requirements explicit.
Prioritisation & MVP agreement
We reviewed the ideas and flows with the client, considering customer value, technical effort and JAX’s resources. We agreed priorities and mapped them into a core flow to guide prototyping and user testing.
2.1 · Research approach
Gather evidence with breadth and depth
We needed to understand how customers chose tyres and arranged fitting, including why they called or visited a branch instead of booking online. The stakeholder workshop surfaced JAX’s assumptions and helped us shape the phone interviews. Those conversations explored customer decisions, behaviours and possible user flows in greater depth than a survey could.
Interview themes then informed the follow-up survey. This helped us quantify customer characteristics and examine how widely the emerging themes appeared across more respondents.
10
Phone interviews
The interviews explored tyre choice, retailer choice and online purchasing.
1,843
Survey responses
The Google Forms survey gathered 563 responses from the website and 1,280 from recent MyJAX members recruited by email. Responses differed between the channels, so we analysed them separately, then compared segments based on answers such as car knowledge and search preference.
Original research readout · Interview analysis identified behavioural insights and questions for the follow-up online survey.
Original research readout · Website and recent MyJAX email cohorts were analysed separately, then compared through response-based segments.
We analysed the interview and survey evidence together, then developed personas, user tasks and a customer journey.
Collaborative research, with a defined contribution
I was the Lead Designer and collaborated with an external UX research specialist. The Head of Design arranged this hands-on collaboration to develop my research methods and analysis skills.
Refining recruitment as the study progressed
The first five interviewees had not completed a website purchase. The invitation was amended to ask about recent online purchasing and purchase intent; selection of the next five considered online purchase behaviour. This was an adaptation within the collaborative study.
2.2 · Research synthesis
Make the evidence meaningful and relatable
We analysed the interview and survey evidence together, looking at differences in tyre knowledge, confidence and service preferences. Personas, user tasks and a customer journey made those differences relatable and connected customer needs to possible user flows.
After personas and tasks, we mapped the interactions, emotions and pain points across awareness, researching, deciding and fulfilment. The journey connected online research, calls, branch visits, purchase and fitting, helping us identify issues and ideate opportunities across the experience.
Research synthesis · The journey connected customer needs across research, selection and service.
Keep the model focused on behaviour
We focused the personas on behaviours and characteristics rather than demographic backgrounds. Gender-neutral names and the absence of portrait photographs helped avoid distracting the team from the differences relevant to UX design.
Alex
The cautious novice
Low tyre knowledge and reluctant to make a large purchase through the website.
Blake
The well-informed, high-touch customer
Knowledgeable about tyres, but prefers the human contact of customer service.
Charlie
The savvy online booker
Knowledgeable, researches independently and is comfortable transacting online.
We arranged user tasks in a matrix so differences between the personas were easy to compare. The matrix also became a checklist for wireframe design, connecting the research to the tasks the interface needed to support.
What the evidence meant for the experience
Knowledge does not always mean self-service
Some knowledgeable customers still wanted expert advice or a conversation before committing.
Implication for the next phase
Keep local-store contact available alongside online booking, so customers can choose the support they need.
Price needs the context of what is included
Choosing a tyre also meant understanding compatibility, fitting and the services covered by the price.
Implication for the next phase
Make vehicle matching and price inclusions visible at the moments customers compare and select tyres.
Search preferences also differed by car knowledge in the compared website-survey segments. This informed offering vehicle and tyre-size search, with branch selection available at different stages.
Behavioural differences that shaped the journey
The behavioural personas gave us a shared reference for customers with different expectations: Alex, the cautious novice; Blake, the well-informed, high-touch customer; and Charlie, the savvy online booker.
Original persona summary: cautious novice, informed high-touch customer and savvy online booker.
User tasks by persona
Research synthesis · Modelled user tasks informed by the research, not observed task-success rates.
Findings behind the customer model
Among website survey respondents, calling or visiting a store was much more common than buying and booking online. The opportunity extended across the website and branch experience.
Reported next step after browsing
| Next step | Website cohort |
|---|---|
| Call a store | 51% |
| Visit a store | 29% |
| Take notes and decide later | 10% |
| Buy / book online | 9% |
Self-reported behaviour · Website survey · 563 respondents. Rounded figures total 99%. These are not website conversion rates.
Search preferences differed by car knowledge
| Car knowledge | Tyre size | Vehicle |
|---|---|---|
| High · 210 respondents | 48% | 29% |
| Low · 108 respondents | 21% | 49% |
Website survey segments · Self-reported preferences. These are two segments, rather than the full survey sample.
Original research readout · Stated search preferences among 210 website-survey respondents with high car knowledge and 108 with low car knowledge. The original’s +27% and +20% markers represent differences of 27 and 20 percentage points, respectively.
2.3 · Feature ideation & business logic
Connect customer needs to possible booking journeys
Feature and content scope was not predefined. I used the research to ideate ways to help the personas accomplish their tasks, then created possible user flows to show where those ideas would fit.
The flows also made high-impact business rules explicit. We explored requiring vehicle, tyre size and branch; making vehicle selection optional; and requiring branch selection first. The diagrams below compare the same persona, Charlie, under each rule.
Charlie’s modelled route when vehicle, tyre size and branch are all required. Vehicle information is requested after tyre choice. This is a proposed flow, not an observed test result.
Charlie’s modelled route with vehicle selection optional. This was an alternative explored, not the agreed booking rule.
Charlie’s modelled route with branch selection required first. This was an alternative explored, not the agreed booking rule.
Different starting points, the same booking requirements
The agreed model let people start with what they knew, while requiring vehicle, tyre-size and branch information before online booking. JAX needed the vehicle details so the system and branch could validate that the tyres ordered would fit; customers could select the wrong size. A branch was required to put the booking through.
Selecting a vehicle automatically supplied tyre sizes for the majority of customers. More knowledgeable customers could start with a tyre size, including a customised size, but still needed to provide vehicle information for validation. A different size was not automatically a mistake.
The flows also modelled how Alex and Blake could research tyres and contact a branch under the same booking model. The requirements applied to online booking; a route could instead lead to branch contact. These are proposed persona routes, rather than observed task-completion results.
Alex’s modelled route under the rule requiring vehicle, tyre size and branch. A persona scenario, not observed task completion.
Blake’s modelled route under the same booking requirements, retaining branch contact. A persona scenario, not observed task completion.
2.4 · MVP agreement
Agree the features and map the core flow
We presented the research-linked feature ideas and possible user flows in the MVP workshop. With the client team, we prioritised what to support in the prototyping and user-testing phase.
The workshop considered technical effort and difficulty, alongside JAX’s resources for populating content and managing services. The outcome was summarised as a feature list and mapped back into the user flow.
Different search preferences informed vehicle and tyre-size entry options; the client’s fit-validation requirement still applied to tyre-first customers. The mapped flow connects “Starting Point” (#5) and “Vehicle & Tyre Match Reassurance” (#10) to the relevant parts of the journey, showing how research-informed ideas became a direction for prototyping.
MVP group · Lower relative effort
Make help available at the point of choice
Inline help/FAQ (#13) and quick on-page help (#17) sit in the matrix’s higher-value, lower-effort MVP group. Both are green, labelled ‘High Effort By JAX’ in the source PDF. Guidance was a priority, with client effort still a consideration.
Roadmap group · Higher relative effort
Phase a service that required more effort
Mobile fitting (#28) sits in the higher-effort roadmap group. It is also green, labelled ‘High Effort By JAX’ in the source PDF. The matrix separates relative value and effort from the client effort marked by colour.
Original MVP matrix · Green means “High Effort By JAX”; yellow means “Standard”. Groups record planning priorities. Mobile fitting later appeared in the prototypes.
MVP workshop outcome · Numbered features mapped into the core flow. Teal circles identify features, not delivery status. The diagram records planning scope, not completed or implemented checkout and wheel-purchase designs.
Short-term strategic goals
| Goal | Stakeholder votes |
|---|---|
| More sales | 7 |
| Customer trust | 4 |
| Happier customers | 3 |
Short-term priorities recorded in the strategic goals worksheet · Stakeholder votes.
The stakeholder workshop prioritised useful information and guidance. Price transparency, store expertise and clear expectations about fitting were central to the experience JAX wanted to provide.
With the MVP direction agreed, the next phase explored how the interface could make these requirements understandable across desktop and mobile.
Reflection
What I learnt from the research
Practical skills I could carry forward
I was fortunate to work with an experienced research specialist who was partnered with me to build my ability to run research and analysis independently in future projects. The hands-on collaboration taught me practical workflows, methods and techniques, and what effective research deliverables should look like.
Confidence to explore better ideas
Reliable user insights gave me more confidence in ideation and design decisions. Understanding customers more deeply made it easier to think beyond the obvious solution and explore new possibilities.
Making a complex booking feel predictable
See the interaction design, Axure prototypes and two usability rounds that followed this research.
02 · Design & testing →