Alex Hewitt
/
ux designer
Car insurance claims submission.
Advantage General Insurance Company (AGIC) needs a more robust mobile application to better compete in the Jamaican market. With the digital wallet and renewal processes already designed, the challenge was creating a claim submission flow that would surpass the existing web process.
UX research, prototyping, visual design, interaction design, usability testing and client presentations.
Approximately 10 weeks
Existing web processes are fairly detailed and very tedious. Users are required to provide documents or information without much forewarning, have little visibility on the amount of sections they need to complete and have no option of saving progress.
Deviate from the web platform to create an enhanced mobile experience by reducing clutter, improving requirements visibility and ensuring the process is easy to follow; but the final solution should still maintain the same business rules and functional logic outlined by the existing solution.
AGIC branches collect 5 times more claim submissions than their online platform. While it can be argued that culturally Jamaica is internet-averse, it’s also apparent that the web submission process is not without its pains.
Users need to have a better idea of the amount of detail they’ll need to provide.
As this is a long and arduous process, users should be able to come back and finish later.
Though complex, the process should be simple, and provide assistance where required.
More can be done to prime user expectations before they are asked for certain info.
There are 5 types of claims AGIC customers can file, with each asking specific questions to determine if any additional info might be required. The same basic info is required by all claims, but the process can grow twofold depending on how some questions are answered.
Instead of asking questions throughout the forms, start with a questionnaire that determines which sections can be left out.
Allow users to complete sections in any order, but assist in recalling what info they may have left out.
Prioritise and capitalise on mobile features that can provide a more useful customer experience.
60 y/o
|
Banking Executive
Uncompromising
Experienced
Well-read
Forward-thinking
An efficient insurance experience
Detailed policy management
Critical, timely reminders
Upfront information for long processes
Web platform inferior to in-branch experience
Going in branch is a poor use of time
Online processes are not always clearly understood
20 y/o
|
Business Admin
Headstrong
Self-reliant
Traveller
Tech- savvy
Ability to complete processes without agent assistance
Get adequate info online
Manage insurance issues remotely
Has issues with some insurance jargon
Often requires agent help to navigate processes
Rarely is able to go in-branch
35 y/o
|
Entrepreneur
Old-fashioned
Hard-working
Open-minded
Better options to complete processes
Friendlier processes overall
Better policy management
Prefers human interaction but in-branch process is too long
Online processes not as clear as speaking with agent
As other aspects of the application had already been designed, the direction for our approach was guided by similar principles.
Enhance the experience while managing limitations of business rules
Shift more user traffic to the mobile platform and away from agents
Ensure higher retention rate with newer drivers
Provide an inclusive, universal and coherent experience
Ensure the mobile adaptation conforms to existing systems and data libraries.
Make this feature usable at the scene of an accident
We aimed to analyse the impact of UX changes that deviate from the web platform to determine if value was added.
Additionally, we wanted to find out what difficulties remained in filing a claim.
Do users understand what’s being asked of them? Is the language used confusing?
How does the section nav impact the user-flow? Is there a need for it?
Are users conditioned to anticipate being asked for certain information?
What aspects of the flow are challenging or overwhelming?
We typically try to find proven examples of features we look to design, but our solution required some innovation to conform with previously designed aspects of the application.
The logic of the questionnaire is to determine what forms, sections or document requests could be omitted from the claim process. The idea is to give users the expectation of being asked for the related info later on.
A claim process can range from about 5-11 different sections, all of varying complexity. It made sense to provide a way to see all the sections required, and to complete those sections in whatever order best suits the information a user has on hand.
Where appropriate, we provide assistance to ensure users stay on track and understand what is being asked of them.
The test was conducted almost entirely remotely, with participants being provided with the test context, a two-part scenario with tasks, and some follow-up questions regarding the experience. Participants were instructed to utilise a high-functioning prototype in order to complete tasks in accordance with the provided scenarios.
Users were given a scenario for a 2-car collision involving 4 people, but 1 person’s info was missing.
Users returned to the app to finish their claim after acquiring the missing info.
We asked 7 follow-up questions, 4 directly related to scenarios and 3 general impression questions.
The positives of having the claim flow questions laid out before the user begins outweighs the negatives. Users are aided by the early prompts and may see a reduction in the amount of interactions they subsequently have in the flow as a result.
Users tried using the section nav when resuming their claim, but attempted to do so using varying triggers. Care should be taken to ensure users can still achieve their desired outcome if they're making fair assumptions.
The claims process requires users to recall and provide a lot of detailed information. We should provide recall assistance but be mindful of how assistance is provided, as users tend to become frustrated by “help” that hinders their goals.
“I definitely like the direction we’re moving in and I’m very pleased with the efforts made to improve the process”
The features meant to improve on the web process were very well received among test participants. Users found the flow direct and manageable.
Stakeholders also expressed great appreciation for the efforts made to enhance and re-contextualize their process without compromising business rules.
This solution is being implemented as of October 2022.
Testing with a high-functioning prototype gave us valuable data that was otherwise missing. We could quickly fix issues and justify feature value to stakeholders.
Missing marketing & demographic data from client and heavy reliance on assumptions was a challenge early on. We didn’t have the opportunity to work as closely with the client as needed given the critical nature of work.
There’s no excuse not to get work done. Rapid testing and iterations answered questions, filled gaps quickly and gave us a basis to justify our work (real numbers are hard to dispute).
Business and user needs are sometimes at odds, but always need to be appropriately balanced, whether implicitly or explicitly.
As designers we need to always be mindful of the technological implications of design (how will saving progress affect databases, local storage, current systems etc).
