Howl

User Verification

Howl

Trust and Safety in Sign Up

Overview

Improving trust and safety at sign up without increasing friction.

role

Design Lead

responsibilities

User research, testing, problem definition, ux copy, interaction design, visual design, and handoff.

Timeline

Sep - Nov 2023

Context

Beta feedback revealed trust and safety issues with address verification

We collected user statements in Canny and prioritized this feedback based on impact and effort. We considered that verifying a user's address was core to our primary value proposition, while trust and safety were crucial to our brand and the success of the product.

reframing statements into insights

Users wanted more transparency with address verification at the cost of lower friction, but did we?

I reframed the user statements into insights that the team could understand and prioritize. To make this easier, I categorized them three different ways and created an insight framing guide to build design education cross-functionally.

👉 transparency

Users don’t understand how their address is verified, which leads them to question if and how we verify users, creating suspicion.

👉 Intentionality

Users are shown their address during signup without engaging an address input, and so they don’t understand how the process works, creating distrust.

👉 safety

Users don’t provide their address, while 1our phone records service is unreliable at finding matching records, 2leading to mismatched data displayed to users, creating security risks.
The problem is the ‘why’ behind the statement. This is the crucial marker of an insight. The pain point is the larger consequence of the problem.

goal

Improve trust and safety while keeping friction low

    The team decided to fit these improvements into a larger Thanksgiving release. The time constraint helped scope broader design improvements to our sign up flow. Below are task flows that I made as part of the ideation phase. They re-imagine transparency, intentionality, and safety in address verification. Specifically, we used a service called Telesign to verify user identities at signup.

    Telesign Verification Task Flow 1: This forces users to consciously choose from 3 methods to verify their address. Here, they choose to use their phone provider. It increases friction by asking for sensitive information, while improving transparency.
    Telesign Verification Task Flow 2: Another take on presenting the phone number verification method.
    Telesign Verification Task Flow 3: This flow reduces decision paralysis by offering two options to the user instead of three. They can verify using their phone provider or verify using their driver's license or home mailer. These were less preferred methods for various reasons.

    mapping

    3 key points of intervention: 1verification options, 2verification errors, 3address confirmation

    I mapped the sign up flow, calling out these the intervention points. The sign up flow diagram helped me to communicate the direction among the design and engineering teams, while the screens proved useful when presenting my intentions to the product manager and ceo.

    Sign Up Flow: This is a fleshed out flow that identifies the three key points of intervention.
    Screens representing the 3 key intervention points: These wireflows helped communicate the project status and direction to the product business teams.

    Hand off

    Improved transparency and safety

    The increased steps and copy made more sense to users and helped them better understand the our app's requirements. To accomplish this, I made info confirmations and callouts feel like achievements and milestones. In addition, I made preferred business paths feel like the common sense option.

    Reach out for the full case study.