LET$PAY: a story of trust and fees
Letgo is a second-hand goods marketplace that connects sellers and buyers locally. Let$pay is the most convenient and safest payment method to use within Letgo.
- Timeline
- Two weeks
- Goal
- Create an in-app payment method for Letgo. The new feature should make the transaction process quick, more secure and hold buyers and sellers accountable. Stakeholders required this new feature to generate a small service fee for each transaction.
- My Role
- Research, Interaction and Visual Design, Prototype, User Test
- Methodologies & Tools
- Design Studio, MoSCOW matrix, Screener Survey, User Interview, Personas, Marvel, Sketch, InVision
Getting to know our users
In order to make sense of the product ecosystem, my team brainstormed a mind map to understand how LetGo works and how users interact within it. Also, an empathy map helped us generate some hypotheses on LetGo users motivations, needs and pain points.
But we wanted real insights so we had to talk to our real users. Our first approach was creating a short screener survey to recruit people for in-depth interviews.
My team conducted 6 user interviews with current LetGo buyers and/or sellers over the phone and in-person. We gathered a significant amount of qualitative data that helped us understand who we were designing for. Furthermore, we validated some of our initial hypotheses and learned about users’ needs and pain-points when making transactions within Letgo.
Insights Synthesis
After categorizing and merging this data in an affinity map, we extracted the following key insights:
- Most people that usually sell on Letgo buy as well, and vice versa.
- There is a lack of trust in second party accountability when making a transaction.
- Frustration by time spent coordinating sales and exchanges.
- Users rely on online payments when depending on well-known companies (i.e. PayPal).
Personas
In order to bring data into life, we crafted personas to represent our users (motivations, current behaviors, pain points…) and ground future design decisions. We designed for our primary persona and accommodated the secondary.
How might we help her complete a secure, efficient transaction?
Design Studio
Two structured design studio sessions helped our team to generate multiple ideas –features– in a very short period of time. These are the steps we followed:
- Review personas
- Define the problem in an specific scenario
- Create solutions individually
- Pitch idea to the team
- Critique based on problem statement, not on personal preferences
- Iterate and refine one best version individually
Feature Prioritization
We classified our ideas using a MoSCOW matrix, prioritizing features based on users and business goals top of mind to create a MVP product (and to avoid creeping featurism!).
The categories where features fell into are the following:
MUST
Critical to the current delivery time box in order for it to be a success.
SHOULD
Important but not necessary for delivery.
COULD
Desirable but not necessary, they would be included if time and resources permit.
WON'T
Least-critical, lowest-payback items, or not appropriate at this time
Design Solutions
After learning that trust was key for the users, the priority of our design was building it.
Let$Pay is an in-app payment method that uses Letgo as a middleman between buyers and sellers executing digital payments. Money stays “in limbo” until both parties are satisfied with the transaction.
User Flows
Assembling the selected features that will shape Let$pay, we created some user flows. Thus, we crafted a “happy path” for our primary persona that helped us plan what to sketch next.
Wireframes & Usability Tests
With feedback from user testing, our ideas advanced to mid-fidelity wireframes using Sketch. Again, the mid-fidelity prototype went through two rounds of usability tests before turning it into high-fidelity wireframes.
The goal of users test was to assess:
- Does this new feature increase users trust when making online transactions?
- Does the contract nudge users accountability while keeping flexibility for editing the logistics of the exchange?
Let$pay Onboarding
Throughout the usability tests, we observed that users didn’t completely grasp the concept of Let$pay.
Consequently, we designed a quick onboarding process with clear instruction on how to connect their bank account or/and credit card to their Letgo profile in order to use Let$pay.
Tutorial
But this was not clear enough… We wanted every user to understand and feel comfortable using the new in-app payment method. To ensure buyers and sellers completely understood the concept of Let$Pay, we included a quick tutorial within the onboarding process.
The Contract
The idea of generating a contract between both parties was our attempt to solve two important issues we found in our research:
- Buyers were weary of the quality of the second-hand good
- Sellers were concerned about buyers haggling
The limbo-bank
As people reported dropping out of deals was a major problem, we ideated this system in an effort to hold both parties accountable. This is how it works:
The transaction fee
One of the requirements from stakeholders was applying a small fee for each transaction. However, based on our research, my team knew that users don’t like fees so we decided to obtain more solid evidence to present to stakeholders. Thus, we distributed a survey to previously screened user and we obtained +30 responses confirming our hypothesis.
Based on what we heard from users, we recommended to stakeholders that they implement a service fee ONLY on Let$pay transactions and that this should be the seller’s responsibility, because they are using Letgo to host their items and make a profit.
These are other features that could be incorporated to alleviate the most important pain points discovered during research: accountability and trust.
- Penalty fees when one of the parties cancels the deal without enough time in advance.
- Rating system for seller and buyers.
I personally would be interested in assessing how the contract could increase accountability in both sellers and buyers. Designing for changing people’s behavior is always tricky. The main problem is that what they say in a usability test environment might be different from what they actually do in real life.