PROBLEM

Users need an efficient way to search for jobs so they can know if they’re compatible, because finding the right job can be emotionally exhausting.

We are in an era of information overload. Users of job-seeking applications are often overwhelmed, uncomfortable, and intimidated by the process itself. On the go, sifting through thousands of job listings, long job descriptions, and minimum qualifications can feel daunting, at the very least.

Regardless of experience, I found the majority of individuals seeking work through mobile applications to both not enjoy the job-seeking process and find mobile applications to cause more complication and confusion. Consequently, productivity and achievement are marginally diminished when users are emotionally unable to use job-seeking apps effectively.

So how do we solve this problem?

“How might we make it easier for users to utilize Glassdoor’s features?”

SOLUTION

Bridging the gap between user and organization

RESEARCH

a conversation with the user

User Interviews + Competitive & Comparative Analysis

I sought out to discover underlying trends that users find frustrating during the job search. Regardless of how many users had mentioned, they use mobile job searching applications to find work, not a single individual said they found them useful. This observed notion was constantly reiterated by each user.

After thoroughly examining the data I had obtained from my users, my team and I collectively performed both a competitive and comparative analysis of similar mobile platforms. We searched for commonalities and differences between Glassdoor and other job searching applications.

Reflecting on both our user interviews and collected data from the competitive analysis, we were able to draw a few conclusions from our findings:

• Users like a socially interactive platform

• Simplicity and minimal distractions are a plus

• Users, regardless of knowledge, can generally spot Usability Heuristics over other competitors

Affinity map

After thoroughly interviewing our users, we were able to document 42 specific insights, grouped into 10 different categories.

INSIGHTS

Further diving into the data that we had obtained through user interviews, I was able to discern three particular themes of importance. These themes were:

• App preferences

• Features for convenience

• Niche job preferences

From these data points, I was able to peel away several emotional/behavioral ties that led to creating ideating a solution.

How might we bridge the communication gap between applicant and company?

PERSONA

“I simply don’t have the patience or energy to sift through numerous job openings”

“I’m a UX Designer who works remotely and lives in a camper van while traveling around the country. I’m currently looking for new work that fits my lifestyle.”

DESIGN

INITIAL IDEATION & DESIGN DIRECTION

Moving from defining the user and the problems they face, we dove deep into the first iterations of our design direction. We performed this through a few different general practices. First, we performed a team design studio.

During this activity, my objective was to pool our design ideations in a time-boxed regimen. This would then produce a collective vision of what we were to produce in our initial rough sketching. We began the design studio with a brief discussion of both our persona and problem statement. We debriefed on various “how might we’s” to ideate our solutions. We then set a timer for 6 minutes and designed one screen per minute. Finally, we held a critique session to debrief on design agreements and common practices to disregard.

The initial challenge was to create new features for the existing application and improve overall usability. Since we did have minimal flexibility in the design system, we opted to improve product filtering, information architecture, and page layouts to create a more modern, clean feel to the interface.

At this point, we were able to create a user flow with multiple possible routes the user can take. Our goal was to make the process as streamlined as possible since many of our users prefer simplicity over-complication.

USABILITY TESTING & PRODUCT IMPROVEMENTS

KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM USABILITY TESTS

Although usability tests brought many questions and concerns to the table, my team and I had to collectively decide which features needed to be optimized to better suit the needs of all users. Through active discussion and collaboration, we decided to make changes, based on user friction, that would allow for better user flow:

1. Improving the filtering feature of the application; users were confused with both filter verbiage and functionality

2. Adding in the feature for a user to communicate directly with the hiring team of an application

3. Making the landing/home page more comfortable and personal for users to begin browsing with ease

FINAL PRODUCT & NEXT STEPS

After producing the final product, my team and I discussed, in our retrospective, how might we be able to further iterate upon our design solution. Through conversation, we were able to conclude that creating different iterations on sizing/typography to better serve accessibility needs for all users would be very important. Further, we would like to implement onboarding tooltips to familiarize a new user with the application. In regards to our teamwork throughout the duration of the design sprint, we all three agreed that breaking up the project into individual segments would have been more efficient for the end goal.