Hudson Responsive Website
During a two-and-a-half-week team design sprint we were challenged with improving the job search functionality of the Hudson responsive website.
BRIEF
Improve the job search functionality of the Hudson site focusing on mobile, resulting in higher job applications and job alert sign ups.
PROBLEM
“Our job search site was designed to achieve better SEO results for our brand, increase job alert signups and increase job applications. We have observed that the service has improved but we are still not competitive in this particular sector of the market, which is causing a loss of potential income to our business. How might we improve this service so that our potential candidates are more successful in their job search, based on analysis of actual job applications and alert sign-ups?”
RESEARCH
We conducted a competitive analysis and found that none of the direct competitors to Hudson are standing out. Companies like Michael Page who cover the same sectors such as legal & finance have a powerful brand and presence but have a similar site to Hudson.Indirect competitors to Hudson are mobile applications, job boards and recruiters who focus on digital & design. These include Futureheads, Glassdoor and Reed. We found that some of these recruitment agencies have friendlier websites and a humanised approach but there is still not a strong leader in this market.
RESEARCH OUTPUT
We conducted 17 usability tests on the current website to see how users would approach the site. Our key takeaways from this were:
- Users struggled to find the filters as they were at the bottom of the page.
- Too much content was being displayed, it was unorganised and very overwhelming.
- Button labels were confusing.
We created a survey based on the job hunting process. We had 51 responses and managed to contact some of them to follow up with an interview. We completed 25 interviews from a wide range of users but tried to focus on the demographics of a typical Hudson candidate. Our key takeaways from the interviews were:
- People would start a job search on a mobile but would feel more comfortable to complete it on a computer.
- They have an expectation of the site remembering the details they entered from their previous visit.
- Users don’t want to upload a CV every time they apply for a job.
THE FLOWS & SKETCHES
To understand how a job search is conducted we completed a task analysis going through the emotional journey a candidate would have starting from deciding they need a new job right until they have received a job offer. We found it can be a stressful journey and a roller-coaster of a ride.We also completed an affinity map where we found the common trends from our interviews. These trends were collated and used to prioritise what features we should address within the remaining time of the sprint.
The features we decided to focus on:
- Introducing an account system.
- Improving the content layout.
- Improving the job search process.
We had the opportunity to run a design studio with our clients. During this session we presented the results from our research then focused the rest of our time on addressing how a candidate would search & apply for a job.
PROTOTYPING & TESTING
A paper prototype was developed and tested. This helped us test the flow and the functionality.During this stage we implemented a new feature called ‘Not for me’ which allows the user to reject a job. The overall perception of this feature was positive and most users understood what the function of the button was with this label name. When this was clicked users were excepting them to be taken back to the job results page.Changes were made based on the feedback and we moved into mid-fidelity as our website was very content heavy and needed to make use of real content. This also meant we received a lot more detailed feedback from our users.
Adjustments were made when users applied the ‘Not for me’ function. Our main issue was users did not notice the tab bars at the bottom of the screen. Four options were being displayed and there wasn’t any prioritisation of these buttons. We went through many iterations and A/B tests of this screen and eventually moved two of the buttons into the main body screen.
The results from our interviews told us that candidates would apply from a computer so we decided the two buttons on the tab bar should be ‘save for later’ and ‘not for me’ as these are what a user would most likely use on a mobile.We noticed users kept looking in the hamburger menu to look for their ‘shortlist’ rather than the ‘account’ icon. We decided to remove the icon and replace this with text saying ‘My Account’. This did not fix the issue and users kept going to the hamburger menu before realising that the function was held in the account system. This led us to moving the account into the hamburger menu where they then looked into the account tab and found the function they were looking for.
For more information please visit http://www.jemmusa.co.uk/Hudson.html