Betatrends · Product design case study
Connecting a Fragmented Interaction Creation Flow
How post-launch behaviour changed a step-based setup into one connected workspace
Betatrends was a market-research platform where creators published research activities called Interactions and interactors responded to them. An Interaction combined content and questions so creators could collect structured market feedback. I worked at Betatrends for around 1.5 years; this case study covers an approximately six-month creator-side New Interaction workstream. The first redesign made the interface more consistent, but post-launch behaviour showed that creators still had to piece the task together.
Role
Product Designer
Workstream
Approx. six months
Team
PO · Junior designer · 2–3 developers
At Betatrends
Around 1.5 years
21:52 → 11:38
Approximately 47% reduction in reported completion time
Reported Hotjar average; methodology details were not preserved.
Final design direction connecting setup, editing, preview, price context and progress in one workspace.
01 · The problem
The first redesign made the flow tidier, not more connected
Creating an Interaction meant coordinating content, questions, eligibility requirements and audience options while also understanding the preview, price, next action and whether every required step was complete.
Using MUI, I helped organise that work into a consistent step-based sequence. It gave the team a practical foundation, but it did not keep enough working context visible.
MUI step sequence
A consistent, buildable baseline.
Context remained distributed
Actions, questions and unfinished work stayed separated across the flow.
Earlier direction · The first redesign created a consistent sequence, but its key working context remained split across the flow.
01
Actions
Important actions were difficult to locate while creators worked.
02
Questions
Growing question lists were difficult to scan, edit and organise.
03
Completion
Unfinished work became visible too late in the flow.
How might we keep creators oriented, make the next action clear and reveal incomplete work early—while staying feasible for a small team working with MUI?
02 · My contribution
I turned recurring behaviour into design priorities
My contribution centred on four areas: synthesising behavioural patterns, designing the connected workspace, prioritising refinements and supporting delivery.
01
Synthesised behavioural patterns
I suggested Hotjar, reviewed recordings and grouped recurring observations into product and design themes with the product owner.
02
Designed the connected workspace
I developed three interface directions and prototyped the workspace selected by the team.
03
Tested and prioritised refinements
I set up most of the directional Maze test with product-owner input and translated the remaining friction into interface changes.
04
Supported handoff and implementation review
I designed MUI-based states, prepared handoff details and reviewed the resulting interface.
Collaboration boundary
Product priorities, MVP scope, MUI adoption, direction selection and technical trade-offs were shared team decisions. Developers handled engineering implementation; I supported handoff and reviewed the resulting interface.
03 · The turning point
Recordings revealed what the new structure still missed
I expected the step-based redesign to make the flow easier to follow. After launch, Hotjar recordings showed creators still searching for actions, losing their place in growing question lists and discovering incomplete work at the end. After the team selected a connected-workspace concept, directional Maze testing showed which of the same issues still interrupted the end-to-end task.
01
Important actions were difficult to locate.
Design response — Strengthen the primary action and keep it in a predictable position.
02
Growing question lists were difficult to scan and edit.
Design response — Separate question types and use accordion states.
03
Incomplete work appeared too late.
Design response — Add persistent status cues before finalisation.
I used those three patterns to focus the next changes: action hierarchy, question management and earlier completion feedback. I explored three ways to connect steps, editing, preview and price context. The team selected a persistent workspace that brought related tasks together and was intended to reduce switching while remaining feasible to build.
Direction A · Persistent three-column workspace
Direction B · Step-led editing with compact preview
Direction C · Horizontal progress with wider workspace
The concepts compared sequential guidance, grouping and persistent context before the team selected the connected workspace.
04 · Final design direction
Five decisions kept the task connected
The first two decisions established the connected workspace. Directional testing then sharpened how questions, actions and incomplete steps behaved within it.
Focused interface evidence · Final design direction
01 · Preview and price context
02 · Workspace and persistent steps
03 · Question management
04 · Actions and final-step context
Redesigning New Interaction feature
01
Keep the outcome visible
Preview and price context stayed beside the developing Interaction while creators configured it.
02
Keep creators oriented
Persistent steps kept the current task and the wider flow visible together.
03
Make long question lists manageable
Separate question types and accordion states reduced how much content remained open.
04
Make the next action unmistakable
Continue became the clear next action while secondary controls remained available.
05
Reveal unfinished work before the end
Icons, text and colour identified missing work while creators could still resolve it.
05 · Reported outcome
Reported completion time fell from 21:52 to 11:38
Earlier flow
21:52
Later flow
11:38
The original case study reported approximately a 47% reduction in Hotjar average completion time after iteration.
The exact cohort, dates, exclusions and task boundaries were not preserved. I therefore treat this as a useful usability signal, not proof that the redesign alone caused the change or produced broader business impact.
06 · Reflection
The first redesign taught me that structure was not enough
What I learned
I initially treated structure as the main problem. The first redesign made the screens more consistent, but creators still had to keep too much of the workflow in their heads.
What I would validate next
If I revisited the work, I would define the task boundary, events and comparison window before launch, then pair completion-time evidence with accessibility and responsive checks.
MUI gave the team a consistent, feasible foundation, but it limited some custom interaction choices.
Explore the full case study for the Hotjar synthesis, concept exploration, Maze findings and detailed interface decisions.