IMPROVED CLAIMS EXPERIENCE

CLYDE CLAIMS

Project OVERVIEW

  • About

    Clyde enables businesses to offer extended warranties, product registration and global shipping protection with tracking all from a single platform. Clyde supports the end to end customer experience from purchasing a plan to filing a claim, to receiving support and a resolution. Clyde increases conversions and inspires customer loyalty at every interaction with clear coverage terms and painless claims.

  • Project details

    Sector: Insurance Tech

    Project Type: UX/UI Design, User Research

    Challenge: Improve claims experience

    Team: Leo Gonzalez - Senior Product Designer

    Director of Product - Caitlyn Cambell

    Lead Developer - Nick Scaglione

Design Brief

  • Problem

    Clyde’s claims process lacks responsiveness, causing delays and requiring excessive manual intervention. Automatic resolution rates are low, and users find the current filing process frustrating. Customer Support feedback highlights a need for optimization to improve efficiency, reduce processing times, and enhance overall satisfaction.

  • Project Goal

    By analyzing customer feedback, support team insights, and key performance metrics, we aim to enhance the claims experience. Our goal is to improve automation, responsiveness, and ease of use, ensuring a more seamless process for both customers and internal teams. We will prioritize changes that simplify interactions, reduce claim resolution time, and increase user confidence in the system.

  • Strategy

    We will conduct user research to pinpoint key pain points, develop and test targeted experience improvements, and implement a more responsive, mobile-friendly solution. By emphasizing automation, intuitive design, and real-time feedback, we will create a faster, more efficient, and user-friendly claims process that meets the needs of our growing mobile customer base.

Discovery

Discovery

Exploring user needs and market gaps to create the right product.

Purple circles displaying claims performance metrics with values for net promoter score, average time to submit claim, first contact resolution rate, self-service claim rate, cost per claim resolution, and mobile claim submission rate. Below, a statement highlights below-standard performance and opportunities for optimization.

PRODUCT AUDIT

Our claims audit highlights key areas for improvement. The average claim submission time is 12 minutes, indicating a need for a faster process. With a 65% first contact resolution rate, many claims require follow-ups, impacting efficiency. Additionally, 73% of claims are submitted via mobile, emphasizing the need for a seamless mobile experience. These insights point to key opportunities to refine our claims process for better efficiency, automation, and customer satisfaction.

User interface for filing a claim with documentation section to upload images or videos and enter product serial number. Includes annotated feedback about issues such as unclear content, non-intuitive navigation, and prioritization of desktop experience over mobile.

DESIGN AUDIT

My product team and I conducted a comprehensive design audit of the current claims experience to identify areas for improvement. We systematically reviewed each step of the process, assessing usability, accessibility, and overall user flow. Our evaluation was informed by direct user feedback gathered from recent usability tests, as well as established UX best practices. We documented pain points, inconsistencies, and friction in the experience, highlighting opportunities to enhance clarity, efficiency, and engagement.

Image showing four categories: Claims Accuracy, Claims Speed, Claims Support, and Claims UX. Each category has colored sticky notes with various improvement suggestions such as improving navigation, optimizing for mobile users, providing more detailed instructions, and including support channels.

Affinity Map

I facilitated an affinity mapping session with the Customer Support and Product teams to synthesize key insights from the claims audit. This exercise helped categorize recurring pain points, align on top user frustrations, and break down complex data into actionable themes. By organizing feedback visually, we prioritized improvements like reducing claim submission time, increasing first-contact resolution, and optimizing the mobile experience. This session ensured alignment across teams and provided clear next steps for enhancing the claims process.

DEFINE

DEFINE

Turn research into clear objectives, create a roadmap, and establish product priorities.

Venn diagram showing three categories: Business Goals, User Needs, and Technical Restraints. Business Goals include improving claims experience and reducing time to submit claims. User Needs include submitting more accurate claims and improving navigation experience. Technical Restraints include file size limitations and leveraging existing design systems.

Aligned Project Goals

This Venn diagram maps business goals, user needs, and technical constraints, ensuring alignment in product development. It highlights priorities like improving the claims experience, enhancing navigation, and maintaining technical feasibility. By visualizing these factors, we streamlined decision-making and prioritized impactful, achievable solutions to enhance efficiency, usability, and automation in the claims process.

Table outlining feature priorities for a project, divided into sections: P1 Must Have, P2 Nice to Have, and P3 Future Have. Each row contains feature names, descriptions, and support methods, such as usability testing and internal testing.

Product Roadmap

The feature roadmap is the best way to move from the above goals to the logistical aspect of the project. Here I aligned with the team to ensure we were prioritizing features that would have the most impact for the business and users. Additionally, it’s important to see how I would help support testing these features, such as user testing or QA. The information can help me weigh out what becomes a priority or not.

IDEATE

IDEATE

Brainstorm, refine ideas, and explore different approaches to shape the product’s direction.

Flowchart of a website's navigation structure. Central "Home" circle connects to sections: Resources, Product, Login, and Demo. Resources link to Blog, Customer Stories, Partnerships, and Documentation. Product split into Extended Warranty, Registration, and Resolution, each with sub-options like FAQ and Request Demo. Login section includes Merchant and Customer Login, with a "File a Claim" option under Customer Login. Demo leads to a Sign-up Form. Includes color-coded navigation key for Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Navigation.

INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE

I mapped out the information architecture of the Clyde website to streamline how users would access the claim submission feature. By designing a clear, intuitive structure, I ensured easy navigation and minimized unnecessary steps. This step is vital in product design as it enhances user experience, increases task efficiency, and makes key features like claim submission easily discoverable.

Flowchart illustrating a product issue resolution process, starting with a user accessing a Clyde account, then proceeding through steps like personal information confirmation, product issue identification, troubleshooting, and claim resolution.

USER FLOW

I mapped out the user journey for filing a claim, focusing on each step a user would take from start to finish. This included identifying pain points and areas for optimization, such as simplifying form fields and reducing unnecessary steps. We plan to test these optimizations to ensure a smoother, more efficient experience.

Step-by-step warranty claim process interface for a Dyson V11 Cordless Vacuum, including contact info, product issue, troubleshooting, description, documentation, failure date, and claim approval.

Low-fidelity wireframes

I designed wireframes for the updated flow we aimed to test, focusing on creating a clear, intuitive layout that guides users through each step of the process efficiently. These wireframes serve as a visual blueprint, outlining key elements and interactions while allowing us to quickly iterate and refine the design. 

Prototype

Prototype

Develop a functional model to replicate the user experience and validate features before full development.

Brand logo design mockup featuring the word 'Clyde' in different styles, colorful circular logo marks with 'C', and primary color swatches with hex codes #F6F6F4 (Gray) and #000000 (Black).
Image showing two gradient examples labeled "Gradient Horizontal" and "Gradient Vertical." Below, a "Type Accessibility" section displays various color contrast levels. The left side features acceptable/high contrast combinations with "AAA" labels, while the right side displays unacceptable/low contrast pairs labeled "DNP." Background colors vary across both sections.

Branding

I worked on rebranding Clyde to align the user experience with the new brand identity, ensuring consistency across all touchpoints. This rebranding was integral to updating the flow, as it required incorporating new design elements, color schemes, and typography to reflect the refreshed brand while maintaining a seamless and intuitive user experience. 

Interactive elements including buttons, carousels, and text links in both light and dark modes, with default and hover states.

Design System

The rebrand included several updates to the design system, such as new color palettes, typography, and UI components, which needed to be tested and integrated into the new claims experience. This ensured that the visual elements were consistent with the refreshed brand identity while maintaining functionality and usability.

Typography style guide with different fonts, sizes, and styles displayed on a black background for headings H1 to H4, using "Oldschool Grotesk" and "Recoleta" font families.
Grid of icons with light and dark variants, including bag, star, heart, message, shield, puzzle, payment, and customer service designs on black background.
A series of mobile screen interfaces displaying a Dyson V11 Cordless Vacuum warranty claim process. The steps include contact information, product issue selection, troubleshooting tips, description of the problem, document upload, failure date entry, claim review, and approval confirmation. Each screen includes navigation options and fields for user input or selection.

High-fidelity wireframes

I leveraged the new design system to create high-fidelity wireframes that would serve as a foundation for usability testing, alignment with the development team, and identification of areas needing further exploration. By incorporating updated design components, I ensured the wireframes were both visually consistent with the rebrand and functional for testing.

Comparison of troubleshooting solutions for Dyson vacuum cleaners displayed on smartphone interfaces, detailing steps for troubleshooting and support access, focusing on user and merchant feasibility.

TROUBLESHOOT EXPLORATIONS

I designed multiple iterations of the troubleshooting experience to explore how we balance user needs with technical constraints. Each iteration aimed to improve clarity and efficiency while ensuring feasibility within existing system capabilities. By testing different approaches, I assessed how design adjustments could enhance usability without exceeding technical limitations.

TESTING

TESTING

Assess how well users can achieve their goals with the product & identify potential pain points

Infographic detailing research objectives and setup for a user testing study. Objectives include assessing user understanding of a claim process, measuring submission time and bottlenecks, and evaluating user confidence post-submission. Setup involves 10 Clyde users testing a prototype on desktop/mobile devices via UserInterviews.com in December 2022. Screener section mentions contacting Clyde customers via email who opted in for research.
List of research questions focusing on claims process usability, claim submission, communication, and transparency. Includes questions about user experiences with submitting claims, navigating the site, understanding claim forms, and receiving information about claim statuses and coverages.

User Testing / Interviews

Leveraging our high-fidelity wireframes, I designed a prototype to mimic the app's functionality for our research participants. I put together a research plan that details how we will test the new claims experience to better understand how we can develop the most seamless claims/support experience.

User Testing Objectives:

  • Assess whether users clearly understand the step-by-step process for submitting a claim.

  • Measure the time taken to complete a claim submission and identify bottlenecks.

  • Evaluate whether users feel confident in the process and understand what happens after claim submission.

Four purple boxes displaying key findings from a survey about claims processing. The findings mention participants' experiences, documentation, understanding of questions, and troubleshooting efforts before submitting a claim.

USER RESEARCH results

Our usability testing of the new claims experience revealed that while 70% of participants found the process timely but tedious, all successfully provided correct documentation and appreciated the video support. The questions were clear and appropriate according to 90% of users, and 80% would troubleshoot independently before submitting a claim. These insights suggest the functionality meets basic needs with effective support materials, though opportunities exist to reduce tedium in the claims process.

Three testimonials in purple-bordered boxes. The first quote is from Gale, 31, who used a desktop, appreciating the convenience of uploading documents from a phone. The second quote is from Chandler, 27, on mobile, happy about troubleshooting options with Dyson. The third quote is from Lexie, 44, also on mobile, discussing a lengthy form but willing to provide details for proper resolution.

User Quotes

Participants in the usability test valued the convenience of mobile document uploading and appreciated access to troubleshooting options and manufacturer support. Though they found the form lengthy, users expressed willingness to provide detailed information when it leads to successful claim resolution. These insights suggest that despite the form's comprehensiveness, the experience effectively balances thoroughness with user-friendly features that enhance the claims process.

Grid of four sections with sticky notes titled What Worked, Needs Improvement, Further Exploration, and Ideas, each with relevant notes in different colors.

Affinity Map

I facilitated an affinity mapping session with our team to synthesize findings from claims experience testing. We organized observations into four categories covering successes, improvement areas, research questions, and potential enhancements. This approach established consensus on priorities and directly informed our product roadmap, ensuring our next sprint addresses the most impactful user pain points.

OUTCOMES

OUTCOMES

Performance metrics, testing insights, project reflection & next steps in product development.

Key Results

  • 39 NPS

    39 NPS score, increased 11 points

  • 4mins

    Time to submit claim decreased by 4mins

  • $2.30

    $2.30 reduction of cost per claim

Flowchart with Phase 1 and Phase 2 action points. Phase 1 includes resolving UX issues, improving FAQs, ensuring fast load times, and fine-tuning claim resolutions. Phase 2 includes AI-driven approvals, tailoring experiences, streamlining backend processes, and testing new layouts.

NEXT StEPS

I worked with the Product team to develop a strategic two-phase plan for post-launch improvements. Phase 1 focuses on refining the experience, addressing quick fixes, and optimizing support, while Phase 2 prioritizes automation and advanced analytics for long-term efficiency. This approach ensures continuous improvements aligned with user needs and business goals.

FINAL DESIGNS

Three mobile screens displaying a product claim process for a Dyson V11 Cordless Vacuum against a gradient orange background. The first screen asks for the product issue type with options like "Power not powering on" and "Broken wand." The second screen reviews the claim details, including contact info and product issue. The third screen confirms the claim's approval, offering a replacement battery.