Improve the efficiency & engagement of the Hubs order dispute flow

Unfortunately not all orders on the Hubs platform go to plan, leading to some unhappy Engineers. Although the product team's focus and responsibility wasn't able to directly improve the quality and delivery of orders, the experience and process in which issues are raised by customers and resolved by the Hubs customer support team is.

Currently nearly 10% of Hubs customer support interactions are due to order disputes, the primary reason of this is due to the number of vague submissions through the dispute flow. These interactions are caused by a number of reasons, many of them lead to multiple change requests being raised and sent to the product design team. This is mainly an ease-of-use issue leading to a poor customer experience. There is a lot of manual work after we agree on a 'remake'.

There are quite a few inefficiencies lack of detail throughout the dispute process, where we often need to go back and forth with the customer regarding certain aspects of the order before it can be finalised. Creating a poor user experience and slowing down the time taken to reach a resolution.

To remove as much of this unnecessary communication as possible we aim to improve the way in which we gather details and reasons for the dispute entered by the customer, as well as reducing down the number of users dropping off and starting a manual dispute by contacting support directly. By making the flow clearer and more intuitive, helping reduce the overall time taken for the dispute to be resolved.

User interviews and feedback from Canny and Hotjar revealed significant drop off on screen 3 (details), along with an audit of the current experience identifying bugs and UX/UI issues.

User feedback included:

Using the Shape Up methodology, I worked directly with developers and content specialists to define appetite and scope. This collaborative approach allowed us to prioritise between development constraints and design goals, ensuring we focused on the highest-impact improvements within the available timeframe.

The main issue was drop-off at the last stage, with no summary or returnable page. Users couldn't review their submission before finalising, leading to low confidence.

I repositioned the final step and added a summary screen that displayed all entered information before submission. This included a summary on the submission confirmation screen as well, giving users confidence that their dispute had been properly recorded and what to expect next.

By communicating the dispute flow better and by automating customer communication we expected to cut the number of interactions dispute related by 75% from the current ~700 a month.