Optimise the Life insurance journey to increase conversion rate and customers comprehension. 

Life insurance - Compare the market 

Cover Type Question - May 2023

Overview

To improve the cover type question on the life insurance journey as this is where the most people where dropping off.

Goal

To reduce drop off on this question and improve customer understanding.

Outcome




Challenges

Working with new stakeholders who had seen a competitor doing it a certain way and wanting to copy. This helped me to develop my stakeholder management to make sure that the user experience wouldn't be reduced by trying to increase conversion rate. 


My role

UX designer

Methods

Competitor analysis, User testing, copywriting.

Tools

Miro & Figma

Team

1 UX designers, 2 front-end developers, 1 copywriter

Year

2023

I was tasked to improve the cover type question within the Life insurance journey because customer where confused about the difference between level term and decreasing cover. 


The product manager wanted to copy what Go Compare had implemented but I thought we could improve upon their designs. I started with looking at competitors and previous user research.


Compare the Market

Go Compare

Exploring more into life insurance led me to see that the terms 'level term' and 'decreasing' are industry standard and so when a customer purchases life insurance all their documents will have those terminology so i believed it was important to not change them but explain to the customer what they mean for future reference. As Comparethemarket pass customers to a provider I felt it was important that we matched those providers as the customer can change their cover type on the provider website so by altering the wording this could cause confusion.

I decided to use Userzoom to test the three variations, our current version (old), Go Compares version and my new design. I wanted to see what customers thought and how they understood the difference between the two cover types.


My design came up on top with customers finding it the easiest to understand the difference between the cover types, I also discovered that:

After testing, I changed the tooltip to the 'i' instead of wording underneath the question as in the testing customers seemed to miss this and not open the extra information when they might have needed it. As this is going to be a muti-stage improvement the tooltip copy has stayed the same from testing but I will be looking to maybe add examples of different customers in the future as mentioned in the testing. This is currently working towards going live and performance to be monitored. 

Question Set Copy and Order - July 2023

Overview

From the success of the redesign of the cover type question, I was asked to review the whole journey and working alongside the team identify areas of customer problems. As all our journeys are soon to be changing to the new design system, I was a great time to test and learn before the change over to make that an easier process.


Goal

To improve conversion through the life insurance journey and help customers be able to answer the questions easily

To help inform the new design systems some things per page strategy and change the question set from one thing per page to some.


Outcome

In testing 

Challenges

Working with a challenging question set which most customers have not done before as life is often a one time purchase. Working with a reduced team and a tight deadline.


My role

UX designer

Methods

Usertesting, design 

Tools

Miro & Figma

Team

1 UX designer, 1 copywriter, 1 optimisation manager, 1 product manager

Year

2023

To start, I ran a Userzoom unmoderated navigation test where 16 users where asked to go through the current live life insurance journey and answer the questions. The 16 parcipants where looking to purchase life insurance in the next 12 months. After reviewing all their videos as they where asked to talk - out-loud, I put a review together to go through with product manager and optimisation manager to review some difficult questions for users and the overall flow. 

From the research there where a few questions that we felt as team could be updated to make it clear to the customers. To get insights from the whole team and include the partnerships manager who has a lot of information about life insurance, I set up a work shop using Miro to come up with ideas for changes. This was a great way of quickly putting ideas together on a video call with every one bringing in their own insights or competitor reviews as I'd asked them to have a look before the workshop.After the workshop, I put the designs together and fine tuned the copy with our copy writer.

An area already identified as an issue for users through the customer operations team and feedbackify, is that during the form we ask users for their phone number if they want our third party LifeSearch to call them. However we then have our own marketing preferences which one of the options is do not contact, but if the user has left their phone number then they will be contacted. This causes many complaints as is not clear, so I asked specifically about this to the users in the navigation task if they understood why they where asked their phone number and if they thought they would be contacted. When showing this to the PM, we discussed that our third party won't let us change the question as they make money from calling people and completing life insurance offline. However we did decide to move the question away from the other marketing questions which apply to Compare the Market and put it with personal details.

To determine how customers would group the questions, I launched a card sort with users being able to group the questions as they wished. This identified 2 clear groups; 'your information' & 'policy information' which within those could be divided into 4 smaller groups. The smoking question was often left on its own when users where grouping so this is a harder one to determine, having spoke with the team we felt it fitted better with personal details than policy. 

Designs which are going to be both A/B tested and Userzoom tested for qualitive and quantitive data.