Loans SUS report
- Astrid Decrop
- Shamsudeen Badamasi
Due date | 19 September 2024 |
|---|---|
Epic | |
Task | |
Designer | @Shamsudeen Badamasi |
Useberry | Discovery & Application, Approval & Acceptance, Guarantor Form, Repayment, Renewal |
Document summary
This report presents the findings from a usability test conducted on Financing, focusing on five core user journeys. The test aimed to evaluate the product's usability, identify pain points, and gather insights for improvement. The evaluation methods included post-test questionnaires, System Usability Scale (SUS) scores, time on task analysis, success rate analysis, and think-aloud feedback.
Objectives
As part of our ongoing efforts to improve the user experience and align our products with strategic goals, we have identified the System Usability Scale (SUS) score as a key performance indicator (KPI) for user satisfaction. Additionally, we will be tracking two other critical usability metrics: time on task and success rate. These metrics will provide a comprehensive view of how well our product supports primary user goals across web and mobile platforms.
The purpose of this usability test is to establish a usability benchmark for the product, which will serve as a foundation for future improvements.
Success metrics
SUS score
Time on task
Success rate
Test plan
Test plan |
|---|
Core user journeys
Persona | Core journey | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Business Owner + not a Moniepoint customer | Discovery & Application: This journey is frequently used by customers and has a high impact on their satisfaction. It includes product awareness & education, loan request initiation, pre-qualification check, address confirmation and guarantor submission. | This journey was selected because it is a primary function that customers perform often and it can enhance overall satisfaction, increase loyalty and retention. |
Business Owner + not a Moniepoint customer | Approval & Acceptance: This journey ensures only applicants who meet the risk analysis and checks can proceed further in the request process, ensuring they get timely, regular and clear feedback about their loan approval or rejection. It includes physical verification, internal approvals, final offer acceptance, agreement signature and amount disbursement. | This journey was selected because it helps mitigate risk, promote retention and generate revenue from credit worthy business owners. |
Business Owner + not a Moniepoint customer | Repayment: This journey allows users to stay on top of their payments, avoid penalties by providing frequent reminders, and multiple repayment options. It is a major source of revenue generation. | This journey was selected because it is a primary function that customers do and it ensures a steady flow of revenue for Moniepoint which is important for sustainability. |
Business Owner + not a Moniepoint customer | Renewal: This journey promotes a seamless and effortless reapplication process and encourages customers to engage with the product again. | This journey was selected because it can reduce churn and increase retention rate of existing customers. |
Business Owner + not a Moniepoint customer | Guarantor form: This journey reinforces responsibility by making business owners take the loan more serious. It is also a risk mitigation tool used for securing a loan against default. | This journey was selected because it helps mitigate risk, promote retention and generate revenue from credit worthy business owners. |
Test environment
The tests were unmoderated and conducted remotely using mobile interactive prototypes which can be accessed on mobile or web. At the end of each core journey tests, participants were asked to answer a couple of questions and to indicate their satisfaction level for each.
Tasks
Core journey | Tasks |
|---|---|
Discovery & Application | Imagine you are a food vendor who owns a business called Sabiplace Food Enterprises. You want to expand your business by purchasing more goods/stock but don't have the capital. However, a close friend suggested a financing app to try. Now, please try to apply for any financing on this app. |
Acceptance & Approval | You’ve just submitted your loan application, please go through the next steps required to get your funds. |
Guarantor Form Submission | Your close friend David Ayorinde Michael recently applied for a loan and has requested that you be his guarantor. Please, use the link below to fill the guarantor form he sent to you. |
Repayment | Assume you are three days behind your repayments, how would you go about settling all your outstanding payments? |
Renewal | Assume you just finished taking a loan and are interested in taking another one, how would you go about doing this? |
Participants
Participant information
Number of participants |
|
|---|---|
Demographics |
|
Selection criteria |
|
Participant profiles
Participant A | Maryam |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Gender | Female |
Occupation | Retail Business (Provisions and groceries) |
Location | Kano State |
Tech savviness | Moderate |
Fintech usage | Uses both trandional and fintech banking apps like GTBank, Opay, Kuda for her personal and business transactions. Prefers platforms that offer quick, reliable transfers. |
Primary devices | Apple phone |
Key insights | Maryam needs financial support for her business but she says she cannot afford them because the interests payments are usually very high. She doesn’t like interest because it is against her religious beliefs. However, she’s willing to compromise because she doesn’t have a choice. |
Participant B | Damilare |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Occupation | Retail Business (Jewellery & Art) |
Location | Lagos State |
Tech savviness | High |
Fintech usage | Uses only commercial bank apps like Access Bank, First Bank and GTB for personal transactions. He is tech-savvy. |
Primary devices | Android phone |
Key insights | Damilare generally dislikes being a guarantor, he made it clear during the test that he would ordinarily have declined the request but for the fact that he wanted to see what it involves that is why he completed it. |
Participant C | Queen |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Location | Oyo State |
Occupation | Retail Business (Jewellery and other fashion accessories) |
Tech savviness | High |
Fintech usage | Queen uses digital banking platforms and business fintech solutions for receiving payments from her customers. She interacts with multiple banking platforms for her business transactions. |
Primary devices | Apple phone |
Key insights | She does not need financing at the moment but can consider it in the futute. |
Participant D | Mukhtar |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Occupation | Retail Business |
Location | Kano State |
Tech savviness | Moderate |
Fintech usage | Primarily uses personal traditional banking apps like Access Bank, First Bank and Sterling. He has never taken a loan before but is open to the idea as long as it contains no interest. |
Primary devices | Apple phone |
Key insights | Mukhtar wants a speedy loan application and disbursement process that is beginner friendly. He is against taking or paying interest because it is against his religious beliefs. |
Participant E | Idris |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Location | Lagos State |
Occupation | Retail Business (mobile and computer gadgets) |
Tech savviness | Moderate |
Fintech usage | He uses only traditional banking apps for personal and business transactions and fintech apps like Opay and Palmpay. |
Primary devices | Apple phone |
Key insights | Idris wants a speedy loan application and disbursement process that is beginner friendly. He is against taking or paying interest because it is against his religious beliefs. |
Participant F | Ikechukwu |
|---|---|
Age | 25 - 34 |
Location | Lagos State |
Occupation | Retail Business (phone gadgets) |
Tech savviness | Moderate |
Fintech usage | Relies mostly on traditional bank apps like Access Bank and GTB for his personal and business transactions. He is not a Moniepoint customer, however he has had to use the POS to make payment for his purchases from time to time. |
Primary devices | Android phone |
Key insights | Ikechukwu is not open to taking loans. |
Recruitment process
I sent out screening questions which were filled by a total of 34 people. 15 of those satisfied the requirements of my ideal participants (i.e. they are business owners, bank elsewhere, not with Moniepoint, live anywhere in Nigeria, and have low to high level of education and tech skill). Each of the participants were privately messaged and sent 2 Useberry links to carry out the test. The tests were conducted remotely, unmoderated and performed using mobile interactive prototypes. At the end of each core journey tests, participants were asked to answer a couple of questions and to indicate their satisfaction level for each.
Usability metrics and results
Success rate definition
SUS score
SUS is a standardised questionnaire used to measure the usability of a product, using a 10 questions 5-point scale to generate a score between 0 and 100, with higher indicating higher usability.
The average SUS score is typically 68. A score of 68 or higher is generally considered acceptable or better than average. Above 70 is good, and above 80 is excellent.
Time on task
The time it takes participants to complete each journey. Shorter times generally indicate better usability. This metric helps to measure efficiency.
Discovery and application: users should/are expected to complete this journey within 5 minutes or less.
Approval and acceptance: users should/are expected to complete this journey within 2 minutes 30 seconds or less.
Repayment: users should/are expected to complete this journey within 2 minutes or less.
Renewal: users should/are expected to complete this journey within 4 minutes or less.
Guarantor Form Submission: users should/are expected to complete this journey within 5 minutes or less.
Success rate
Discovery and application: this journey is considered successful when participant submit their financing application in 5 minutes or less, and if they go through the application flow as intended
Approval and acceptance: this journey is considered successful when participants accept or decline an offer, sign agreement document(s), disburse the offer and reach the “running loans screen” in 2 minutes or less while going through the flow as intended.
Repayment: this journey is considered successful when participants complete a payment successfully in less than 2 minutes while going through the flow as intended.
Renewal: this journey is considered successful when participants renew their financing successfully within 4 minutes or less while going through the flow as intended
Guarantor Form Submission: this journey is considered successful when participants provide their required information such as NIN and BVN willingly without hesitation, are willing to provide the required documents, successfully complete and submit the guarantor form in 5 minutes or less while going through the flow as intended.
Results
Core journey | SUS score | Time on task | Success rate | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Discovery & application | 76.6 | 8m 30s Took 3 min 30s longer than expected due to address confirmation frustrations | 75% | Home and business address confirmation frustrated participants. They were confused as to why they had to confirm them multiple times. |
Approval and acceptance | 76.3 | 5m 38s Took 3 min 38s longer than expected partly caused by the disbursement flow. | 80% | 3 Participants complained that the steps were too long e.g the disbursement flow. And few others said they found some of the copies confusing. They also suggested that the repayment plan should be more prominent. |
Repayment | 77.5 | 1m This was within the time frame | 80% | No one complained about this flow, however one of the customers I tested with offline said that the payment options were confusing. |
Renewal | 80 | 4m 33s This was within the time frame | 100% | This task took few seconds longer the expected time. A participant pointed out that the terms Markup were used interchangeably to mean the product and the charges. Another one found the address confirmation flow frustrating once again. |
Guarantor form submission | 81.7 | 6m 21s Took 1 min 21s longer than expected | 90% | More than one participant complained about the length of the flow and that some of the copies were unclear. |
Post-test qualitative questionnaire feedback
Participants provided additional insights through open-ended post-test questions:
Common pain points | Some of the frustrations mentioned by customers include;
|
|---|---|
Positive feedback | Some participants found some of the following features helpful:
|
User suggestions | Some participant suggestions are:
|
Recommendations for improvement
Based on the test findings, the following recommendations are proposed to improve the product’s usability:
Design changes
Address confirmation: revise the number of clicks required for address confirmation, the map + pin + address is sufficient along with the checkbox to streamline the user journey and reduce time on task.
Sending guarantor forms: clarify instructions on [specific screen/interaction] to improve success rates.
CTAs: revise the copy of some CTAs such as “Proceed” to “Confirm” and “I have confirmed my business category” to “Confirm”
Alerts: Highlight important information that customers should not miss with the correct level of urgency. Currently, there's a message that says, "If you miss a payment, we will have to take the amount you owe from all your accounts." This is shown in blue with a blue exclamation mark. Given the seriousness of this message, it should definitely be in red or orange. Another message says, “charges and fees will be deducted from your disbursement account." Given the importance of this message, it should definitely be in orange.
Text Sizes: Make some of the texts more legible e.g. texts of size 12px can be increased to 14px
Copy Revisions: Make texts concise and clearer
Repayment plan Summary: Make this more concise to optimise space
Quick wins
Minor adjustments will be made to:
Alerts, changing their colours to emphasise the level of urgency
Address confirmation steps, reducing the number of clicks for address confirmation steps
Repayment plan widget would be made to be more concise.
CTA copies to be more concise.
Long-term recommendations
Consider a more comprehensive redesign of the renewal flow, especially focusing on multiple ways to encourage customers to take another loan if they need it.
Conclusion
Summary
The usability test revealed that while the product performs adequately in most areas, there are specific pain points related to address confirmation flow, offer disbursement flow and UI elements like alerts, text sizes etc. By focusing on these areas, we can significantly improve the user experience.
Next Steps
The design team will implement the recommended changes and prepare for a follow-up usability test to measure improvements in SUS, time on task, and success rate.