Summary
We conducted a usability test to evaluate the ease of use and clarity of several key touch points within the application. The areas tested were:
End-to-End Flow
In Default (Make Payment)
Entry Point 1 (Banner and widgets)
Entry Point 2 (Banner and widgets)
OVD Widgets and Banner
WCL & MKU Widgets and Banner
OVD Banner & Popup test
Methodology
The usability test sessions were conducted with participants using interactive prototypes, where tasks were crafted to mirror typical interactions that a Bank Overdraft (BO) user might encounter. Participants were observed completing tasks to assess their understanding of various UI elements, terminology, and process steps within the application. They were asked targeted questions regarding specific terms and actions to gauge clarity, ease of use, and intuitiveness. The sessions included open-ended questions and Likert scale ratings to capture subjective feedback on satisfaction, clarity, and potential areas for improvement.
Data was collected by tracking participant responses to questions and observing their interactions with key touchpoints, including banners, widgets, pop-ups, and loan-related features. Each session included detailed notes on areas participants found confusing, elements beneficial, and features they suggested for refinement. Findings were summarised based on the percentage of participants who understood or misunderstood each concept.
Personas
The participants for this test were 5 Customers who have taken an overdraft facility with one or more banks.
Tasks and Questions
Find links to the prototype below
Find a link to the questions below
Overdraft Usability test questions
End-to-End Flow
Question 1: Please tell me what you understand by “Regularization period”?
Objective: To gauge the participant's understanding of overdraft terminologies.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 0
Did not understand the content: 5
Comment(s): None of the participants understood the term which indicates a need for change in the term used.
Question 2: What do you understand by “This credit line can be renewed upon good behaviour”?
Objective: To ascertain the understanding of the message.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content:5
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s):
Question 3: Please what do you understand by: “Upon renewal, our contribution of 20% can also be increased based on good behaviour”?
Objective: To ascertain their comprehension of the message.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 5
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s):
Question 4: On this screen, did you see what will happen if you miss a repayment?
Objective: To ascertain that participants read the warning message.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 5
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s): The participant understood that missing a repayment would result in their account manager's intervention and actions taken by the bank if delays continue.
Question 5: What do you understand by “sales volume”?
Objective: To assess participants' understanding of “Sales volume” meaning.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 4
Did not understand the content: 1
Comment(s):
Question 6: What do you understand by “interest owed”?
Objective: To assess participants' understanding of “Interest owed”.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 5
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s):
Question 7: Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1-5, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 5 is very satisfied.
Objective: To gauge the participant's level of satisfaction in the application process.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Results:
1 - Very Dissatisfied: 0
2 - Dissatisfied: 0
3 - Neutral: 0
4 - Satisfied: 5
5 - Very Satisfied: 0
Comment(s):
Question 8: Please rate the application process on a scale of 1-5, where 1 is very hard and 5 is very easy.
Objective: To gauge participants' views on how user-friendly and accessible the application process is.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Results:
1 - Very Hard: 0
2 - Hard: 0
3 - Neutral: 2
4 - Easy: 3
5 - Very Easy: 0
Comment(s): One participant mentioned that application steps are quite lengthy, however, the process is necessary because of the market we are dealing with (His words: Necessary evil)
Question 9: Was there anything confusing about the whole process?
Objective: To identify bottlenecks in the application process.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content: 2
Did not understand the content: 3
Comment(s): The participant found certain aspects of the prototype unclear, particularly around insurance provider selection and the lack of clickability for specific features like “no collateral” information
Question 10: Did you encounter any difficulties in reading or understanding any text or labels?
Objective: To identify incomprehensible text, terms, content/copy.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Understood the content:4
Did not understand the content: 1
Comment(s): Users found terms like "regularisation period" unclear, suggesting that simpler language would enhance clarity.
Question 11: Were there any features you found/elements that you found particularly helpful or problematic?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Didn’t have comment(s):2
Had comment(s): 3
Comment(s): They found the “confirm” and “continue” buttons functional and easy to understand but had comments on “Use of insurance”.
Question 12: Do you have any additional comments/suggestions for improving the experience?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Didn’t have any suggestion(s):3
Had suggestion(s): 2
Comment(s): Two participants suggested reducing the application steps, one in particular noted their experience with a similar service (Kuda) had fewer steps and felt more streamlined.
In Default (Make Payment)
Question 1: How would you go about paying back what you owe?
Objective: To gauge the users’ understanding of how repayment works.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result
Understood the content: 4
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s):
Question 2: What options are available for repaying what you owe?
Objective: To ascertain the participants saw the options available to them and understood the process of repaying.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result
Understood the content: 3
Did not understand the content: 1
Comment(s): Didn’t notice he could pay by transferring from his other bank account into his Moniepoint account.
Question 3: Imagine your overdraft limit is currently too high or too low for you, how would you go about updating your overdraft limit?
Objective: To ascertain whether users noticed the placement of the “Manage Limit” button
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Saw the button: 5
Did not notice the button: 0
Comment(s):
Question 4: Imagine you don’t want to continue using your overdraft facility. How would you go about that?
Objective: To ascertain whether users noticed the placement of the “Deactivate Overdraft” button.
Participants:
Total participants: 5
Result
Saw the button: 4
Did not see the button: 1
Comment(s): The one participant didn’t bother to scroll or explore this screen. A user suggested adding a liquidation feature to make early repayments.
Entry Point 1 (Banner and Widgets)
Question 1: What was the first thing you noticed on this screen?
Objective: Gauge initial focus on UI elements.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Noticed the banner: 3
Did notice the banner: 1 (found distracting elements in banner design)
Comments: Suggestions included minimising distracting visuals.
Question 2: Did the banner/pop-up catch your attention? If not, why?
Objective: Assess the effectiveness of banner placement.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Yes: 3
No: 1
Comments: The “No” respondent said he noticed the account balance card first.
Question 3: Was the message on the banner/pop-up clear to you?
Objective: Measure the clarity of messaging.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the content: 5
Did not understand the content: 0
Comment(s):
Question 4: Is the information about your loan qualification easy to comprehend?
Objective: Test the comprehensibility of loan qualification info.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the content: 4
Did not understand the content: 0
Comments: No further clarification was required.
Question 5: Was the size, colour, or placement of the banner/pop-up appropriate, or did it feel intrusive?
Objective: Evaluate the design elements of the banner.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the content: 3
Did not understand the content: 1
Comments: Suggestions to simplify by removing icons like the money and coin symbols.
Question 6: Was the pop-up confusing or distracting in any way?
Objective: Identify elements causing distraction.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the content: 3
Did not understand the content: 1
Comments: Participants recommended minimalistic design elements.
Question 7: Was it easy to know what action to take after seeing the banner/pop-up?
Objective: Assess call-to-action clarity.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the content: 4
Did not understand the content: 0
Comments:
Question 8: What would motivate you to take the next step?
Objective: Identify motivating elements for action on the design.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Chose “CTA”: 4
Did not choose CTA: 0
Comments: Displaying associated costs and interest rates was recommended.
Question 9: What would you change about the banner/pop-up to make it more effective or user-friendly?
Objective: Collect feedback on design improvements.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
No suggestion(s): 4
Gave suggestion(s): 1
Comments: Recommended adjustments included bolder CTA buttons on the banner and less distracting graphics.
Overdraft Feature Comparisons
Question 1: What was the difference between the first and second options?
Objective: Compare clarity between different UI presentations.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Noticed a difference between the two widgets: 0
Did not notice the difference between the two widgets: 4
Comments:
Question 2: When viewing the first option (account balance card), was it immediately clear that it represents your overdraft?
Objective: Assess the clarity of overdraft representation in the account balance view.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Yes: 1
No: 3
Comment(s): Colour coding was suggested to make overdraft status more immediately recognizable.
Question 3: When viewing the second option (widget), was it related to an overdraft feature?
Objective: Evaluate the clarity of the overdraft widget.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Yes: 4
No: 0
Comment(s): Participants preferred the widget for its distinct and straightforward representation.
Question 4: Which design helped you understand your overdraft status better: the one integrated with your account balance or the widget?
Objective: Determine the preferred design for overdraft clarity.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Account Balance Design: 1
Widget Design : 3
Comment(s): The widget design was widely preferred for its simplicity and focus on overdraft details. The user who chose “Account Balance Design” noted the simplicity of the overall design.
Question 4: Did you notice the overdraft feature more quickly in the first or second option?
Objective: Assess which design highlights the overdraft feature better.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result
1st Option (Account Balance Design): 1
2nd Option (Widget Design): 3
Comment(s): Participants noted that the widget design brought better visibility to the overdraft feature and preference for the second widget due to its clarity on overdraft status.
Question 6: Was the overdraft progress tracker easy to find in both designs?
Objective: Determine the visibility of the progress tracker.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Yes: 4
No: 0
Comment(s):
Question 7: In the first option (with "Add money" and "Manage" CTAs), how did you feel about the available actions?
Objective: Evaluate CTA clarity in the first design.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the CTAs: 3
Did not understand the CTAs: 1
Comments:
Question 8: In the second option (with "Use now" and "Manage" CTAs), how did you feel about those actions?
Objective: Measure the effectiveness of "Use now" and "Manage" CTAs in the widget.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the CTAs: 4
Did not understand the CTAs: 0
Comments: Participants found "Use now" more intuitive for encouraging engagement.
Question 9: Which CTAs would motivate you more to engage in the overdraft feature?
Objective: Identify the most motivating CTA.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Add Money: 1
Use Now: 3
Comment(s):
Question 11: Is there anything you would change about the first or second option to improve your experience?
Objective: Collect improvement suggestions.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Had suggestion(s): 1
Did not have suggestion(s): 3
Comments: Clearer labelling and colour codes on the account balance design to highlight overdraft.
Question 12: Do you feel any important information is missing from any of the options?
Objective: Identify any information gaps.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Had comment(s): 0
Did not have any comment: 4
Comment(s):
Overdraft Widget and Banner
Question 1: When viewing the first option (widget), how quickly did you understand the overdraft status (e.g., "not in use," "due in x days")?
Objective: Test ease of overdraft status comprehension.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Easy: 4
Difficult: 0
Comments: Colour-coded indicators were effective in the first design.
Question 2: When viewing the second option (the overdraft progress tracker on the account balance card), how quickly did you understand the overdraft status?
Objective: Evaluate the clarity of overdraft status in the account balance card.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Easy: 4
Difficult: 1
Comment(s): One participant suggested a more direct presentation of status without requiring interaction - Prototype functionality error.
Question 3: Was the meaning of the colour codes (urgency levels) clear to you in both designs? Did any state feel ambiguous or confusing?
Objective: Assess the effectiveness of colour-coded urgency cues.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Results:
Understood what each colour represents: 4
Did not understand what each colour represents: 0
Comments: Urgency levels through colour were understood particularly in the widget.
Question 4: Were you able to easily understand what action to take in each state (e.g., “due shortly,” “in default”) in both designs?
Objective: Determine if the CTA were intuitive.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Understood the CTAs: 4
Did not understand the content: 0
Comments: Both designs provided clear indicators for action.
Question 5: Overall, which version (integrated into account balance or standalone widget) do you prefer for managing your overdraft in different states?
Objective: Identify preferred design for overdraft management.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Integrated into account balance: 1
Standalone widget: 3
Comment(s): The widget was seen as a more comprehensive tool for tracking and management.
Question 6: Is there anything you would improve in either option to better convey the urgency or to improve the user experience in different overdraft states?
Objective: To collect suggestions for enhancing urgent communication.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Had suggestion(s): 1
Did have suggestion(s): 3
Comment(s): Recommended automatic pop-ups for overdue statuses to prevent missed payments.
Question 7: Do you feel either design missed any important cues or information regarding your overdraft status?
Objective: Identify any missing critical information.
Participants: No major information gaps were identified.
Total participants: 4
Result:
Had suggestion(s): 4
Did not have any suggestion(s): 0
Comments: Participants felt both designs provided all necessary cues and information.
WCL & MKU Widgets and Banner
Question 1: When viewing the widgets, how quickly did you understand the loan status (e.g., "not in use," "due in x days")?
Objective: Test ease of WCL/Markup status comprehension.
Participants:
Total participants: 4
Result:
Easy: 3
Difficult: 1
Comments: The participant stated the WCL/MKU status in the account balance card was somewhat confusing at first glance.
Question 2: Was the meaning of the colour codes (urgency levels) clear to you in both designs? Did any state feel ambiguous or confusing?
Objective: Assess the effectiveness of colour-coded urgency cues.
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Understood what each colour represents: 3
Did not understand what each colour represents: 0
Comments: The user noted that the second option was clearer in displaying urgency through colour changes (e.g., when in default or recovery). The first option's colour codes didn’t immediately catch the user's attention.
Question 4: Did the available actions make sense depending on the loan state you were in?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Yes: 3
No : 0
Comments:
Question 5: Does the placement of the widget feel natural or accessible in helping you manage your loan?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Felt natural: 2
Did not feel natural: 1
Comments: While the user found the widget and CTA buttons logically placed, one commented that an excessive number of buttons made some screens feel “choked up. (Assumed all the prototype screens will be live all at once)
Question 6: Is there anything you would improve to better convey the urgency or to improve the user experience in different loan states?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
No Improvement: 1
Improvement: 2
Comments: A user suggested adding cues about the consequences of missed payments to reinforce the importance of taking action and differentiate between in default from in recovery colour.
Question 7: Do you feel any important cues or information regarding your loan status is missing?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Important Info is not missing: 2
Important Info is missing: 1
Comments: A participant mentioned they want to know how much is owed in total and another recommended adding reminders of the implications of different loan statuses could provide added clarity.
OVD Banner & Popup test
Question 1: Was the message on the widget & pop-up clear(Qualify to borrow a loan? Can get a higher loan amount? Can resume an application? Have a loan in default/recovery?Have missed a payment?) Did you immediately understand these?
Objective: To ascertain whether the widget and pop-up message are clear and intuitive
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Understood the message on the widget & popup: 0
Didn’t understand the message on the widget & popup: 3
Comments: All participants needed an explanation for “In recovery” widget copy.
Question 2: Between the banner/pop-up stand out enough for you to notice it?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Widgets: 1
Pop-up screen: 2
Comments: All participants suggested a combination of widgets and pop-up banners.
Question 3: How well did the colours, fonts, and layout help you understand the urgency or importance of each message?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Understood what each colour represents: 3
Did not understand what each colour represents: 0
Comments:
Question 4: Was it clear what action to take for each message? (e.g., borrow more, resume application, resolve loan default)
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Understood CTA: 3
Did not understand CTA: 0
Comments:
Question 5: Did the CTA buttons feel relevant to the message/text shown?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Yes: 3
No: 0
Comments:
Question 6: Was there any message where you were unsure of what to do next? If so, which one and why?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Had suggestion(s): 3
Did not have any suggestion(s): 0
Comments:
Question 7: Is there any additional information you would like to see in these banners or pop-ups to make them more useful?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Had suggestion(s): 3
Did not have suggestion(s): 0
Comments: Yes, more information on the implications of taking or ignoring actions (especially around missed payments and defaults) would make these messages more useful.
Question 9: How would you improve the design of any banner or pop-up to enhance your experience?
Objective:
Participants:
Total participants: 3
Results:
Had suggestion(s): 2
Did not have suggestion(s): 1
Comments: One suggestion was to display repayment frequency options (e.g., weekly, bi-weekly, monthly) in the pop-up. They felt this would add flexibility and clarity to the repayment process.
Key Findings
Terminology and Content Clarity:
Many users struggled with specific terms, such as "Regularisation period" and "Sales volume," which none understood initially. The term "Interest owed" was also unclear for some.
However, participants generally understood terms linked to behaviour-based renewal incentives, such as "Good behaviour," and the implications of missed repayments were clear to all participants.
User Satisfaction and Ease of Use:
All participants rated their satisfaction with the process positively, with most giving a "Satisfied" score of 4 out of 5.
In terms of ease, participants were split between "Neutral" and "Easy," with no responses indicating significant difficulty. The overall design was deemed accessible but could benefit from simplifying specific elements for easier navigation.
Design and Functionality of Banners and Widgets:
The banner was generally well-received, with participants appreciating the prominence of key information. Some, however, found it visually distracting, suggesting a preference for minimalist design without icons like "money" or "coin" symbols.
The widget was preferred over account balance integration for clarity, especially concerning overdraft status visibility. Suggestions included adding colour coding and clear labelling to enhance recognition of overdraft limits and account status.
Call-to-Action (CTA) Effectiveness:
Most participants found "Use Now" to be the most motivating CTA, with "Manage" also receiving positive feedback. The clarity and immediacy of action were acknowledged, with participants suggesting better labelling and placement to make these options more accessible.
The CTAs were generally clear in purpose, but participants recommended increasing the prominence of options like "Add Money" for more intuitive navigation.
Overdraft Feature Clarity:
The overdraft widget stood out as the preferred design because it offers participants clearer information on overdraft limits and actions to be performed.
Colour-coded cues effectively communicated overdraft status, although participants suggested enhancing these colour cues to emphasise urgency (especially in recovery) and to prevent missed payments.
Process Improvements:
Participants expressed a desire for a reduction in application steps, citing smoother experiences with competitor apps that had fewer stages. Additionally, some participants recommended automatic pop-ups for overdue payments as a proactive reminder.
Banner and Popup:
Participants responded positively to both Overdraft widgets and popups, as well as Working Capital and Markup widgets and popup screens, highlighting their usefulness in guiding their actions.
Feedback was that the widgets should be combined with the banners for effectively communicating information (According to a user - If I miss the information on the widget, I can not miss the same information on the pop-up screens.
Feedback, Observations & Suggestions from Test Participants
All the participants did not understand the term “regularisation period”
One participant suggested that a detailed screen that shows the total and the breakdown would help him easily know the total to pay back, unlike the way the facility information is being shown now.
Two participants couldn’t read what the insurance was because the info icon was not a prototype.
One participant didn’t understand how the signature part of the agreement works and suggested that the process be simplified.
Two participants needed an explanation of why the amount would change before final approval.
One participant had questions about the Management fee and what constitutes a management fee should be clearly stated.
Two participants suggested reducing the application steps, one in particular noted their experience with a similar service (Kuda) had fewer steps and felt more streamlined.
One participant did not notice he could pay from outside Moniepoint
One participant suggested including a brief explanation of how he qualified for the said amount.
One participant suggested that all the benefits be clickable
One participant observed and suggested that terms and conditions should be summarized
Three participants requested an explanation for the “In recovery” banner.
All participants noted that the WCL Progress Bar (especially in default) is not correct.
One participant mentioned the icon and pictures on the logo on the banner were distracting.
Recommendations (Quick Fix)
Simplify the “Regularization period”
The progress bar should represent the number of months or weeks or biweekly and the green bar should represent the good repayment while amber (in default) and the red (in default).
Change the “In Recovery” banner and widget copy
Include a modal for “What is insurance for?
State why the provisional offer amount will change before final approval