Going
Re-Design
Going is a flight finder subscription that needed minor, but impactful UX and UI tweaks to optimize for its users. We brought the best out of this responsive product one iteration and one micro interaction at a time.
Role
UX Design, UI Design, Research, Interview Conduction, Prototype Development
Project length
5 weeks
Tools used
Figma, Figjam, Miro, Photoshop, hand sketch, procreate
Deliverables: Site map, information architecture, Hi- fidelity wire frames, prototype
I first came across Going.com after reading "How To Fly For Free," by Scott Keys. The book and companion site were exactly what my wife and I had been looking for - A flight-finding tool that exploits market trends and deals. It took us multiple sessions on the site to grasp exactly how the site and main tools were meant to function. I couldn't help but ask myself "Could this be better?"
I noted our confusions, questioned others in their frustrations, and started building a case.
Going.com is a great tool, with a good user interface. That being said, its functionality is so minimal to be confusing, limited, and unintuitive, requiring far too many external sites and clicks to be tolerable.
With minor tweaks, going could be more useful, instinctual, and functional for its user.
- Going lacked an intuitive search filter function for its flight finder.
- It had inconsistencies with its button structure.
- And needed to reduce user frustration when digging for flight details.
I found users had the same recurring concerns.
- Users reported looking for search features that seemed not to exist.
- Users desired additional features and expressed frustrations with how the "watchlist" section functioned.
- Users found answers to their questions difficult to locate
Is that it? I feel like more should happen here. Do I wait for emails or something?"
shouldn't I be able to search for more than one passenger?
Shouldn't there be some way to control the results, how do they know when I want to go, or what my price range is, or if I want to bring someone?
Secondary research - Primary research - Sketch - Build - Test - Question - Sketch - Build - Test - Question - Repeat - Repeat - Repeat- Repeat- Repeat- Repeat- Repeat- Repeat- Repeat- Repeat - Repeat - Repeat - Repeat - Repeat - Repeat - Repeat "experience.
One of the user's biggest frustrations was the number of pages and clicks it took to operate the "Watchlist" section of the site. In tandem with that concern was the lack of filters in that section to refine their search. The problem became - how to add features, while lessening clicks and pages at the same time.
I can't stress this enough, Going has a great general design approach. Its color pallet, playful graphics, and large airy aesthetic look is modern, pleasing, and has room to breathe.
My goal became to make minor, but necessary, user-based tweaks while keeping that aesthetic in place.
Nothing seems to bring out problems and things you have missed like building and testing a prototype. This attempt was no different.
User feedback from preliminary testing suggested more search features were needed. This created the need to re-order and prioritize the search features that were used the most.
Search tabs were re-ordered and a "more" tab was created to house additional, less prominent, search functions.
Adding simple instructions to the correct page increased user testing success by 30%
Going was inherently slick, but it didn't function how users expected it to. Users gained efficiency, and clarity by adding key search functions and bringing flight info front and center - making Going an overall better tool for its' users.
