Helping Rocket clients build their financial future with Rocket Rewards.
Role
UX Research Intern
team
Hillary Soletic
advisors
Nicholette Piecuch
Timeline
July 2022
Type
Internship Project
overview
Launched in November 2022, Rocket Rewards is Rocket Companies' first loyalty program. While the company consists of an ecosystem of 17 businesses, Rocket Rewards launched serving clients for only one of them: Rocket Mortgage. The following research study investigates scaling Reward capabilities for three additional Rocket companies for a Phase 2 rollout.
Responsibilities
Stakeholder communication & management
Craft research plan
Prepare & conduct usability tests
Analyze findings
Present insights and recommendations to stakeholders
project summary
Context
Rocket Rewards launched in November 2022 with the mission of helping clients save money on their next home purchase. The program rewards members for taking the steps they're already taking as they move toward buying a home.
This case study illustrates a usability analysis to understand the scalability of earning and redeeming points across four Rocket companies. Prior to launch, I ensured program logistics by advocating for user understanding of the newfound service.
My Impact
Through my analysis, I was able to discover a gap in what clients perceived as program legitimacy. With these issues identified, design and service revisions were made to instill client trust.
Aided Transparency
Updated design provided information as to why redemption value varies per goal.
Status indicators added for "in-progress" and "completed" activities and tracking goals.
Extended Discoverability & Ease of Use
Updated design includes sort/filter for "Earn" activities.
Refined Program Logistics
Point distribution widened to provide clients more flexibility with the available rewards that work within their schedule.
research plan
The Ask, the approach, the delivery
Our Rewards stakeholders seek evaluative research to minimize risk before UI web development. Our insights will inform product decisions for the next design iteration of the Rewards dashboard.
Stakeholders
Research Methods
Evaluative research Unmoderated usability testing Rose, Buds, & Thorns
Deliverables
Lucid Board containing all research content
Presentation of raw research to stakeholder
1-page summary report
Scope
rocket Companies Involved
target audience
Located in the U.S. | Ages 18-65 | All genders | Varying knowledge of Rocket Companies | $20k-$200k+ income
User Journeys / Touchpoints Tested
While testing was done for both desktop and mobile, the following research is based on desktop.
"My Rewards" Page
"Earn" Page
research goals
What stakeholders want to know
Most useful information and interactions for earning rewards
Point distribution with setting and completing multiple reward goals
Level of understanding of different states of the "Earn" filter dropdown
How users react when the reward goal is changed
What we want to learn
What first-time vs. return users need to understand earn activities
What the threshold of cognitive overload on the "Earn" page is
How often users expect to change their reward goal
Usability Test
crafting the usability test
On Usertesting.com, I built two (identical) tests for both desktop and mobile; and released them to 10 participants each.
Scenario building
For this usability test, participants were to impersonate a Rocket Rewards user who is looking to earn points. Test takers began by finding how many points they have earned thus far. Next, they sought to understand their Rewards dashboard; and explore other activities for redemption.
Task 1: Understanding the default goal set
Provide a rating for the following statement: I am able to understand the different ways to redeem rewards. Explain your reasonings.
What information is confusing or missing within the "My Rewards" page?
What do you expect to do when you click on the "Set As Goal" button(s)?
Task 2: Assessing satisfaction of credit explanation
How satisfied are you with the information on the "Home Purchase Closing Cost Credit" pop-up?
Task 3: Determining interaction expectations and information logic
Provide a rating for the following statement: It was easy to navigate to the "Earn" page.
Provide a rating for the following statement: I was able to find information cues to determine navigation for the "Earn" page.
Provide a rating for the following statement: "Earn" page presents information in a logical order.
Provide a rating on the amount of information on the "Earn" page. Explain your reasonings.
How do you feel about the point distribution per activity on the "Earn" page? Are they fairly distributed? Explain your thoughts and reasonings.
Task 4: Gauging interaction expectations and activity progress
What do you think of the options within the "Exploring Activities For" filter on the "Earn" page? Are there filter options missing or confusing to you?
If you were to return back to the "Earn" page at a later time, what information would be helpful to understand your activity progress?
Task 5: Evaluating interaction expectations and overall satisfaction
Navigate back to the "My Rewards" page. How often would you expect to change your rewards goal?
How would you rate the overall quality of the "Earn" page?
How satisfied are you with the "Earn" activities?
How likely are you to recommend a friend or colleague to complete an activity to earn a reward towards home purchase or refinance, mortgage payment reduction, buying a car, or getting solar panels?
synthesis
searching for trends
From the test results and recordings, I was able to gauge prospective clients' thoughts, expectations, and behavior.
Rose, Buds, & Thorns
To analyze the raw data, I employed the research method of Rose, Buds, and Thorns. This technique allowed me to evaluate what's working well (Roses), opportunities for improvement (Buds), and struggles or challenges (Thorns). The below board is of desktop & mobile insights combined.
rose: Highlights & Successes
"My Rewards" page
"Earn" page
buds: Opportunities for Improvement
"My Rewards" page
"Earn" page
thorns: Struggles & Challenges
The more participants interacted with the "My Rewards" and "Earn" pages, the more conflicting viewpoints they experienced.
"My Rewards" Page
Problem 1: confusion between number of points needed to redeem and current point value
Users are unsure whether the 38,000 points listed under “Other Ways to Redeem” is their current points earned or how many points it will take to redeem those other goals. If the latter, users are unsure how many points other goals require–putting a mental burden of doing math on the user.
Problem 2: point value varying between goals
The current design leads users to believe that point value varies by goal. Users were confused why their points didn’t go as far with some redemptions; going as far to say that redeeming points for Home Purchase Closing was the best (and most obvious) deal.
"Earn" Page
Problem 3: Disparity in point distribution per activity
Users experienced confusion in point distribution. They were perturbed by all activities (except for the Prequalified Approval Letter) being worth 100 points, despite some activities requiring more time and energy.
Problem 4: Uncategorized activities due to lack of sort / filter functionality
Users have to scroll the entire page to peruse all "earn" activities. Sorting and filtering by activity will provide users more flexibility and speed in accomplishing tasks.
Key Takeaways
Design Recommendations
Provide more details on why the redemption value changes per goal.
Offer the ability to sort and filter "Earn" activities that will encourage discovery.
Present status indicators for: a. "In progress" and "completed" activities on the "Earn" page b. Tracking goals on the "My Rewards" page
Reassure users that all available rewards are accessible on the "My Rewards" page.
Widen point distribution to provide clients more flexibility with the available "earn" reward opportunities that work within their schedule.
Learnings
Communication breeds the most effective research
This project, and my summer as a whole, was a lesson in cross-team collaboration and communication. The Rewards team was a newly formed team with a lot of moving and shifting parts and team members. What initially started out as generative research into starting a loyalty program morphed into designs needed with fast turnaround times–and created with not enough research. As a Research team, we were playing defense. A lot of our work being done was evaluative, trying to course-correct high-fidelity designs. This underscored the importance of Research starting and remaining a pillar of the design process through the evolution of a product.
