GoodWorld Mac Screen.png

Good World

Good World

                                ROLE: UX, WIREFRAMES, PROTOTYPES, RESEARCH, USER TESTIng

                               ROLE: UX, WIREFRAMES, PROTOTYPES, RESEARCH, USER TESTIng

SUMMARY: GOOD WORLD is a social donation platform that allows users to donate to organizations using "#donate" without ever leaving Facebook or Twitter. GoodWorld is a small startup that needed a way to expand their user base.

THE CHALLENGE

  • How can we build trust in the Good World platform?

  • How do we build a solution that remains true to Good World’s existing standard of being simple to use?

  • How do we encourage micro donations?

THE PROBLEM

Users who want to donate to a charity or cause using #donate, are not comfortable with the technology and have no incentive to continue to interact with Good World once their donation was complete.

THE SOLUTION

Using the existing dashboard, create a Good World community that allows users to share and interact with their Good World friends. This was done through the use of a badge system, providing sharing options, and utilizing the simplicity already  built into the technology behind #donate.

UX TOOLS

RESEARCH

The Affinity Map to give us a starting point to figure out how users think, feel and act when it comes to donation. I learned that this was a good way to see what commonalities and differences in the ways that we thought about donation. I  discovered that there are social and economic concerns as well as internal and external motivations including religion, tax benefits and trust.

AFFINITY MAP

COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS

For the Competitive Analysis I suggested that we each look at other companies that were having positive results with "virtual wallets". We knew we had to include  Google WalletVenmo because our client was already aware of two competitors. I knew that a "game element" was important to the GoodWorld so I also included companies like Starbucks and Swarm.

This allowed us to see where there were gaps in the market that we could develop for GoodWorld. At this point in the process we were considering an app or separate GoodWorld product. (This proved to be a wrong assumption but more on that later).

USER INTERVIEWS

The client had limited users' data which posed a challenge for us in getting direct user input. To overcome this hurdle I suggested that we use several methods to get a variety of data and to get a sense of people's sentiments towards spending, charities and donations.   

 1) Surveys

An online survey allowed us to get responses from a variety of users. This was especially helpful because GoodWorld did not have a detailed understanding of who their current users were. The survey gave us a broad pool of people so that we could track general trends and learn about the demographics of people who tend to donate.

2) User Interview 1

I was also very interested in seeing how users interacted with #donate. My teammate Thao observed people using Twitter while I observed user with Facebook. By doing this I was hoping to find any pain points users were having as well as any pleasure points that might be helpful further down the road.

The results here were very surprising to me. Users had three prominent reactions/ concerns to #donate. They were: interest, trust and comfort. I think because I was introduced to #donate through our client I had implicit trust in them immediately. It did not occur to me that new users would be concerned about the technology.

What if my account gets hacked?
— Brain

Users also had concerns about the non-profit organizations. They weren't sure if the organizations could be trusted. But, overwhelmingly people thought the idea was cool. They were intrigued that you could donate to a cause that you found while browsing Facebook/Twitter and then donate to them without ever leaving the platform.

3) User Interview 2

My teammate Michael devised a unique way to observe how people spend their money. We gave users Monopoly money equivalent to their monthly income. We saw "The Money Myth" in action where users did not donate because they believed only large donations would be impactful.

They felt that multiple small donations or "micro donations" wouldn't be effective. For example, when given $3 (which our client wanted to offer), users chose to keep the money rather than donate it to any organization.

WHAT I LEARNED

  1. The desire to donate is largely intrinsic- people don't expect to receive anything in return for their donations. However, they can be influenced by external factors such as tax savings, social recognition, and peer pressure. 

  2. Donating is seen as a private activity. Because donors are internally motivated to give, they don't see the need to tell others for fear of bragging. But they still want to spread awareness for the causes they support, only if it seems organic and casual. 

  3. Positive correlation between happiness and the act of donating. We don't know if happiness led to more donations or the other way around. But we knew that our design needed to produce and prolong these positive emotions.  

  4. Rewards could be used to increase interaction. Badges were useful for self motivation but not for competition or extrinsic motivation.

 

DESIGN STUDIO

Finally it was time to sketch. Keeping everything we had learned in mind, we began to sketch. The goal was to create different modules for possible features, experiment with different layouts and once finished, observe any emerging patterns.

This is how we came up with our initial MVP features which were:

  • Expanded Donation History
  • Visualized Concepts
  • Sharing Options
  • Global Community
  • Refer a Friend
  • Balance Screen

WIREFRAMES

DESIGN PIVOT

We realized that the solution were designed could fit in a variety of platforms and after checking in with our client we had to choose the best platform. Looking at the existing touch points we decided that the existing dashboard was the best place since users already had to interact with it after their initial sign up.

ANNOTATED PROTOTYPE

FINAL DESIGN