top of page

Iterative Unmoderated Usability Test

Project Overview


The "Return Reason Code" iterative unmoderated usability test was conducted for an online retailer to evaluate the clarity and effectiveness of two new return reason codes. These codes were introduced in response to customer complaints about receiving used or improperly packaged items, particularly within a product returns program intender to give customers more convenient choices to return items they had purchased. The codes represented reasons for returning the item.  The study aimed to ensure that these new codes would accurately capture customer issues and provide actionable data to improve the return process. The intended outcomes of the UX improvements included a better End-to-end customer experience and reduced returns frequency.

 

Objectives


The main objectives of this usability test were to:

  1. Assess the clarity of two new returns reason categories (codes): "Product condition unacceptable" and "Packaging condition unacceptable."

  2. Determine how well participants could apply these codes in specific scenarios.

  3. Collect insights on participants' interpretations and any potential confusion surrounding the new codes.

  4. Inform the decision-making process regarding the refinement or implementation of these reason codes.

 

Implementation

 

  • Participants: Six participants (three females and three males) were recruited for this unmoderated usability test.

  • Platform: UserTesting.com was used to provide an environment where participants could interact with the return reason codes independently.

  • Tasks: Participants were shown prototypes of the new reason codes and were asked to:

    1.  Interpret each reason code and explain any ambiguities.

    2.  Choose a reason code for a scenario involving a worn item.

    3.  Select a reason code for a scenario where an item arrived in improper packaging.

    4.  Share any additional thoughts on the return reason codes and the overall return experience with the online retailer shopping experience.

​

See example of a usability plan template.

 

Key Qualitative/Directional Insights

 

  1. "Product Condition Unacceptable" Code:

    •  Participants consistently associated this code with physical issues such as wear, flaws, or damage.

    •  The code was deemed clear and effectively communicated the notion of unacceptable product condition.

  2. "Packaging Condition Unacceptable" Code:

    •  Participants often confused this code with "Damaged During Transit."

    • While intended for missing original packaging, participants associated it with any packaging issues.

    •  The overlap with "Damaged During Transit" prompted suggestions for more explicit differentiation.

  3. Desire for an Input Field:

    • Half of the participants expressed the need for an open input field to provide specific return reasons not covered by the predefined list.

  4. Additional Findings:

    • Some participants were unsure if not having the original packaging was a valid return reason.

    • Confusion was noted between "Arrived Late" and "No Longer Needed" as reason codes.

 

Outcomes and Impact

 

  • Usability Improvements: The study highlighted the need for clearer differentiation between similar reason codes and the addition of an open input field to capture a wider range of return reasons.

  • User Feedback: Valuable insights were gathered, demonstrating that the new reason codes generally resonated well but required refinement for better clarity and effectiveness.

  • Design Adjustments: Based on the feedback, the online retailer could make informed decisions to improve the return process and enhance customer satisfaction by addressing the identified issues.

 

Conclusion


The "Return Reason Code Usability Test" provided crucial insights into the effectiveness of new return reason codes introduced by the online retailer. The study revealed that while the "Product condition unacceptable" code was well-understood, the "Packaging condition unacceptable" code required clearer differentiation from "Damaged During Transit." The need for an open input field was also highlighted to accommodate unique customer return reasons. These findings will guide the retailer in refining their return process, ensuring a more user-friendly experience and better capturing the nuances of customer return issues. Future iterations should focus on clear, distinct reason codes and flexible input options to meet diverse customer needs.

​

Thought Leadership On The Topic of Usability

​

Article: Iterative Usability Testing as Continuous Feedback: A Control Systems Perspective

​

Article: Usability Testing with Real Data

​

Book: Forget The Customer. See The Person

​

bottom of page