CASE STUDIES
UL Flex 3 Fulfillment System
Overview
UL sought to replace it's aging internal fulfillment tool, "Flex", for their core Testing, Inspection, and Certification (TIC) business. The previous system (Flex v2) became too costly to maintain and expand functionality to keep pace with the needs of the business. As part of the effort to explore future alternatives, the decision was made to conduct UX Discovery to determine User journeys, Needs/pain points, etc. UX was also asked to help define a draft of potential functionality to be included in the scope of the project when requesting funding.
Client:
-
Underwriters Laboratories (UL)
​
Role:
-
UX Team Lead
Target Audience:
-
Internal UL Users
Research Approach
As the UX Lead, my job was to evangelize, educate, and train both product teams and business representatives on UX processes, why de do them, ROI of each activity, and the potential impacts of skipping steps. I also advocated for process changes to include UX at every step of the product discovery and design process.
Discovery Objectives
​
-
Conduct Extensive User Research
-
Identify UL business goals for this solution
-
Collect initial assumptions from business representatives and stake holders
-
Determine proper range of participants including vertical divisions, horizontal groups/teams, global representation etc.
-
Conduct user interviews and collect information on who they are, what they do, how they do it, what they like, and their current pain points.
-
Understand user journeys/workflows including all tools and current work-arounds.
-
Leverage research to validate and prioritize assumptions based on frequency and impact
-
​
- Discovery Research Outputs
-
Define UX Design Principles
-
Propose UX Design Architecture
-
User Experience Maps (current state)
-
User Personas
-
Discovery Research Conducted
​
-
400+ Initial “assumptions” collected from business representatives and stakeholders
​
-
Identified Range of Participants (for proper user representation)
-
Vertical Divisions
-
Appliances, HVAC and Lighting (AHL)
-
Life and Health Sciences (LHS)
-
Small Appliances
-
-
Horizontal Groups/Teams
-
Certification Office
-
EMC Wireless
-
Global Market Access
-
Transaction Center
-
Multiple Listing Team
-
High Speed Team
-
Sales Team
-
-
​
-
20+ Hours of User interviews
-
17 participants
-
Included different time zones, countries, and region
-
Walked us through entire workflow, validated needs, and captured pain-points to understand the “why” of users’ actions, thoughts, feelings, pains and frustrations
-
Recorded sessions and observed users via screen sharing, in context, to identify current work-arounds, common shortcuts and other unarticulated needs
-
​
-
Users provided the following information
-
Functional Role Title and Team
-
Description of Role
-
All of the tools used in their workflow
-
Primary Operations
-
Workarounds
-
Desired Visibility
-
Goals
-
Must Have’s
-
Nice to Have’s
-
Pain Points
-
Quotes
-
​
-
Additional Information captured (looking for feedback based on UX assumptions)
-
Level of Engagement
-
Complexity of projects
-
Communication with Others
-
Need for info outside of Flex
-
Manual Repetitive Operations
-
User Pain Points
​
Flex’s functional limits make it cumbersome
Many simple operations are not allowed and many require multiple repetitive operations. Most users have developed a number of work-arounds to compensate for Flex's shortcomings. Users said Flex is “cumbersome and time consuming”
Flex doesn't handle some types of projects well
Flex can’t accommodate its wide range of use cases: simple use patterns, complex projects, billable vs non-billable, cross-service, or manager oversight. It has limits and shortcomings in handling the specific needs for different verticals and horizontal groups.
​
Users can't see relevant info and there is a lot of noise
Visibility limitations are both physical and content related. Many users need to use multiple large screens to see: multiple tabs and windows, multiple open applications, large # of columns, multiple different views, etc. Excess visual ‘noise’ makes searching and finding data difficult.
​
Users are often required to know specific details
Excess information in drop-downs, specific entry limits, and/or lack of easy access to known data requires users to know significant tacit and historical knowledge (ie CCN#s, Industry codes, product categories, quote #s, project #s, correct spelling of names, specific email addresses, etc.)
​
Flex is very slow & has long delays b/w actions
System "wait time" is a big pain point for users. Some have to do other tasks in other windows while systems update before continuing. Users can wait 10-15 minutes for data to update before they can use it or trust it’s current. Several people mentioned the spinning processing wheel.
​
Users must use multiple apps outside of Flex
Most users require other applications to do their job. Some reported that due to Flex shortcomings, they have developed multiple work-arounds that require use of added software systems, databases, and operational methods.
Business Considerations
​
There’s a lack of Standard Operating Procedures
Each business unit works differently, causing difficulty working across the company divisions. This includes both operational procedures, processes, and systems used. It also includes inconsistency with data entry and use of Flex fields, even within a group.
Flex doesn’t facilitate Management or Sales
Sales processes are primarily conducted outside Flex (in Oracle, etc.) and may not transfer properly. Many users reported that they had to ‘redo’ Sales inputs to correct workflows. Flex has the data but does not facilitate the organization calculation needs of managers.
​
Flex tool must promote project traceability
Historical project traceability was mentioned several times
and is an important component to UL processes. Flex has limits and does not support long-term storage of information for future access, updates, or changes after projects have closed.
Key Findings
​
-
Due to distinct differences between UL services, standard processes and procedures vary greatly across UL divisions and groups; the new Flex tool will need to accommodate a wide range of users, processes, workflows, and use patterns
-
The current Flex tool works well for some simple uses but isn’t adequate for complex, bundled multi-service projects
-
Users don’t find Flex difficult to use but they have created all kinds of workarounds to compensate for its shortfalls
-
Users want to customize Flex to accommodate their specific personal and group needs
-
Users want a better User Experience that eliminates manual, repetitive, and common operations, and auto-populates known data
-
Flex has the potential to facilitate managing operations but is not capable of it currently
-
Most users have to use additional software to replace Flex shortcomings but Flex could reduce or eliminate these with new features or functions
-
Global and regional differences are primarily process related and don’t require special Flex features or functions (within the same team)
-
Currently there is little to no incentive to complete tasks in "real-time" but users want a tool to facilitate their work, not just be a task they ‘have to do’
Flex 2 User Experience Map
As an output of discovery research, I created high-level maps of the current Flex 2 user experience to easily understand the current activities, actions, support needs, user roles, integrations and future opportunities for Flex 3.
User Personas
​
Our extensive research identified eight user personas with similar workflows and needs. These would be used moving forward to help make user related decisions and ensure we are accounting for all of our different user needs.
Story Mapping Exercises
​
In order to assist the product team in taking the discovery research and making it more actionable, I then conducted story mapping exercises. Story mapping is a visual exercise that helps product managers and development teams define the work that will create the most delightful user experience. It helps to identify potential epics, features, and stories as well as provides a rough estimate of the potential size of work when creating budget proposals. For Flex 3, 118 Epics and 564 features were identified that would be designed, developed, and deployed over a three year period.
Measurement of Success
​
Aligning with UL strategic initiatives, we determined a strategy for measuring success including the quantitative metrics used analyze and measure each identified Flex 3 areas of focus.
