Initiative & Context
A new initiative exploring the design of an internal communication system within a web platform (internal / field chat). The focus was on centralizing communication, reducing screen switching, lowering cognitive load, and supporting more efficient task and information management.
Outcome: screen-level UX specifications for the comments feature.
Goals
-
How do users navigate through the app?
-
Are workflows intuitive, efficient, and quick (time saving)?
-
How easily can users find their way (wayfinding)?
-
How many steps or clicks are required to complete key tasks?
-
What insights can inform screen design and overall user experience?
Methodology & Analysis
-
Competitor analysis
-
Interviews with CSMs and customers' Account Excecutives - internal exploration.
-
Participant recruitment via CMS and account executives.
-
In-depth interviews with field managers and site supervisors
-
Qualitative exploration of real communication practices and workflows.
🔍 Competitor Analysis – Process Overview
Understand how internal chat features support team communication without disrupting the primary workflow in similar platforms and domains.
Evaluation Criteria
-
Presence of an internal communication system & chat feature.
-
Message behavior: Real-time/dynamic (e.g.,WhatsApp).
-
Compactness & familiarity: Follow a messenger-like mental model
-
Accessibility: Available & usable for all relevant users
-
Visual presentation: Clarity, layout, and UI of the chat interface
Key Findings | UX Insights
Most participants expressed strong support for an internal chat-based communication system, appreciating its immediacy and dynamic nature, confirming the initial hypothesis.
-
Support for an internal communication solution
-
Users predominantly rely on third-party chat tools (e.g., Teams, Messenger, Google Chat) for day-to-day real-time communication.
-
Axisting email-tool seems slowe and less immediate → different mental model from real-time chat.
-
Upgrade comments feature → faster, more visible, and efficient communication.
-
-
Mismatch between existing comments feature - and users’ mental models
-
Comments feature exists across tools, but adoption is low.
-
Users reported inconsistent presentation across screens:
-
Different visual placement
-
Different interaction behaviors
-
Inconsistent input field behavior
-
Some access only via an overflow (three-dot) menu
-
-
👤 User Quote: "Across the product in general you have comments and activity log. But then, in Tool A and Tool B, you've got just one kind of box that doesn't even really say 'comments'... It's becoming evident that there's a lack of UI consistency throughout the product."
Tool A:
Comments field is fixed - does not scrolls with log; new comment jump down
Tool B:
Comments field under the “Activity Log”; scrolls with log; new comment jump down
Tool C:
Comments field is under "Comments; scrolls with log; new comment jump up
Tool D:
Comment field in side Issue panel; scrolls with panel’s log; new comments jump up
Main Takeaways
Implications & Outcomes 🚀
-
Consistent interaction patterns → upgraded comments ⇒ easier collaboration & increased engagement
-
Upgraded comments align with users’ mental model → quick conversations ⇒ faster, more visible & efficient communication.
Potential Improvements 🛠️✨ Alternative Sketch
-
Visual & behavioral consistency → critical for features intended for frequent, real-time use.
-
Recognition over recall:
-
Users rely on visual cues and habitual patterns rather than memory.
-
Inconsistent design prevents recognition, leading users to overlook the comments feature.
-
