I had the opportunity to upgrade a product discovery process for designing and testing new ideas in two companies—different in some ways, yet similar in others. I’d like to share this experience, focusing on the strategies and tools we used to address various business goals and adapt to the teams' structures and maturity levels in embracing Human Centered Design.

Local Bank—the B2B segment: Challenges and Achievements

The Task:

Initially, there were no dedicated researchers, so the Discovery process relied solely on business analysis and design before moving to development. In some cases this approach led to significant rework after release, potentially causing customer churn or a drop in transaction volumes. Despite these challenges, this method worked for a long time due to the expertise of the product teams and businesses.

However, as competition in online banking intensified, the need to develop faster and reduce features that poorly addressed users' needs became increasingly critical.

Challenges:

• The process from idea to release was lengthy not only due to the involvement of legal and security teams ensuring regulatory compliance but also because of challenges in prioritizing resources and making decisions.

• Conducting B2B research was difficult as managers were reluctant to provide client contacts, and users of banking applications were not always the direct clients.

• The lack of an initial research team meant starting from scratch and gradually building trust in research data within the product teams.

Solutions:

1. We began with trial cases to demonstrate the value of research in B2B, finding willing product teams, and presenting results at demos. This approach took time and was followed by new challenges due to the long time-to-market (TTM) and the lack of resources to monitor how the design of new features evolved throughout the development process.

2. Once management saw how research data helped make decisions faster and reduce costs by improving UX before development, our team grew to eight people with a mandate to integrate research into workflows, particularly where there were the most new ideas and significant changes. Although we still couldn’t catch all UX issues before release, we conducted a comprehensive User Audit of the 100 most important user flows on our main online platforms to help prioritize the backlog.

3. This was when the business realized they no longer wanted to lose money on a high churn rate, revising old user scenarios and seeking to reduce costs in the call center by minimizing the need to explain how to fill out forms and send bills.

   Over the past two years, our team has expanded to 16 dedicated professionals—researchers, UX editors, and UX analysts—responsible for the user experience across all stages of the production process for over 120 product teams within small, medium, and especially large businesses (which presented the biggest challenge but yielded the most appreciative users).

   We established a checkpoint for reviewing all designs before development, which increased team involvement in top-tier product development without becoming a bottleneck.

Building trust between the business and the research team was greatly facilitated by our efforts, along with HR, to showcase results both internally and externally. We also established an innovative Research Lab with rooms where we invited product teams and business stakeholders to observe users struggling with interface issues, such as tapping the wrong button or being frustrated by excessive banners.

We used top-notch researchers and advanced technologies, like emotion-detecting neural networks, which was only possible thanks to the support from top management.

Outcomes:

• Within two years, we reduced legacy critical issues (when it’s impossible or almost impossible for the user to finish the task on their own) from 86 to 14 and prevented new critical issues from reaching production. By addressing top UX problems, we positively impacted churn rates for key banking products and increased the active client base in the small business segment through digital channel initiatives.

• We categorized changes by Discovery requirements, ranging from extensive idea validation to rapid implementation.

• We faced significant challenges due to limited team influence on larger platforms until our team expanded. Training designers in research did not yield the desired results due to their high workload. Product owners conducting customer development often produce superficial and incorrect data, used to justify rather than validate ideas.

• Over three years, we cultivated a Human-Centered Design approach, ensuring that all product teams saw the benefits of validating ideas before the development, were not afraid to make mistakes, and could pivot projects based on research findings. Management's willingness to adapt processes and decision-making systems was crucial.

Local Retail Company: Challenges and Achievements

The Task:

I was invited to organize UX research and to restructure the Product Discovery Process for a team tasked with unifying the client platforms of three retail chains and creating a single widget platform. This would allow for the rapid deployment of new marketing and other ideas through an admin panel, bypassing lengthy development cycles.

Challenges:

• The team was still merging. So no unified process.

• The three retail chains had different businesses with varying interests and KPIs. For example, the loyalty program did not align with the interests of trade marketing or delivery, yet all wanted to dominate the first block of the client applications. The big retail company operated like a mycelium network—no clear leader, with interconnected but often conflicting interests.

• The retail industry has to release new features and promote new products very fast. If you’re late for the hot season - you’re late. Many features were released prematurely and required subsequent revisions, leading to additional development cycles and costs.

• Customers often did not navigate beyond the first screen of the applications.

Solutions:

1. We proposed restructuring the Discovery process across all network teams by gradually introducing new elements to address two key issues: validating the necessity of features from a customer needs perspective before development, and preventing critical UX issues from reaching production.

2. We selected pilot projects to implement these changes, focusing on both research and design sprints, as well as a new approach to feature prioritization. Although we encountered initial setbacks due to the company’s cultural inertia, we gained valuable insights. Some ideas weren’t prioritized in time and became obsolete, while others were released prematurely and failed to deliver the expected impact.

3. After gathering enough information on which decision-making tools, processes, and research methods would be effective for the company, we proposed a new approach. This approach emphasized shorter work cycles (1-month discovery sprints instead of quarterly sprints) and more frequent, shorter research sessions. This allowed us to quickly pivot when designing new ideas while still gathering essential feedback.

Outcomes:

• Successful implementation in certain areas improved customer satisfaction metrics and motivated product teams to systematically improve Discovery and incorporate research into their processes.

• We analyzed our mistakes and launched a new cycle with a refined backlog prioritization principle (RIISE) and mandatory research stages in the Discovery process for new products, including several design and research cycles. This required management to promote a data-driven decision-making culture and give product teams the space to experiment and adjust based on new insights.

Initially, we aimed to implement new principles within six months. However, we underestimated the inertia of a large holding company and the necessary process adjustments. Consequently, meaningful progress on the accumulated cases and team readiness only began after a six-month delay. Despite this, all teams demonstrated a strong willingness to invest in the changes.

Comparative Analysis

In both companies, UX research and a Human-Centered Design approach were intended to enhance the Product Development process, ensuring better products and features while building trust between the company and its customers. However, we used different strategies to achieve this.

In the bank, I initially couldn’t make significant changes or show immediate results, so I made each research project count. Only after gaining the support of top management did I manage to change the discovery process and reduce the number of critical issues in each release.

In the retail company, it was crucial to focus all resources on major projects and handle design and research differently. We made this choice, knowingly sacrificing the quality of other features. However, after the initial major project, we revamped the process for the entire team, learning from the mistakes made along the way.

Both cases illustrate the importance of adapting approaches to the specific business context and company culture. Implementing Product Discovery processes requires not only changes in workflows but also cultural shifts, ultimately leading to significant improvements in user experience and business outcomes. My journey in both companies has shown that perseverance, strategic planning, and a willingness to learn from setbacks are essential in driving meaningful change.