Page 1Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Quote and Payment Requests Mobile (iPhone) Usability Test

Results

Conducted by Jayne SchurickUsability Consultantjschurick@gmail.com

(408)353-1293

Page 2Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Objectives

• Do the location and flow of replying to an inquiry with a quote make sense?

• Can owners make changes to an existing quote and resend?

• Do the location and flow of sending a payment request make sense?

• What do owners think about not being able to do advanced edits in the mobile experience, such as changing payments?

Page 3Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Test Format and Participants

• Remote test using AirPlay with AirServer to mirror the participant’s iPhone to their computer and then share with the moderator using WebEx.

• Conducted January 23-29, 2015.

• 4 property owners*

*The study was intended to also test the AirPlay/AirServer/WebEx process of conducting mobile usability tests. Out of 8 owners who have iPhones and were willing to download AirServer and try this process, only 4 were able to complete the process.

This is not a viable long-term process for conducting mobile usability studies. There are alternatives, with pros and cons, that we can discuss.

Page 4Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Experience with app

• All participants had previously downloaded the app but don’t use it regularly because:

– App doesn’t have enough functionality. Reasons given: can’t upload a rental agreement, process a refund, view reservation details, view payment details, modify rates, synch calendar with housekeepers, look at calendar and see who’s booked.

– Participant said it’s circular (and frustrating) because Safari directs her to the app but then she can’t do something in the app and has to go to the website.

– Push notification doesn’t include details he needs, such as dates, number of adults and children and whether the property is available.

– App seems more geared toward travelers than owners.

– The website is mobile-friendly. “Why should I use the app?”

– Website is just easier.

– No option for property managers.

– Participant said the app includes her personal email address in traveler replies. Therefore, she only uses it to check the inbox and calendar when she’s traveling but won’t use it to reply.

Page 5Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Inbox• After editing the quote and changing the

dates and number of guests, one participant was confused because the inbox shows the original dates and guests, even though it shows an updated quote amount.

Recommendation:

• If an updated quote can be shown, it seems like it should be possible to also update the dates and number of guests.

Page 6Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Reply• It was very clear to all participants how to

reply to an inquiry.

• However, one participant’s initials were listed as “NO” (Nathan Van Orden) and he didn’t initially recognize the reference to himself.

Recommendation:

• Not sure what to recommend regarding a user’s initials when the last name consists of 2 words.

NO

Page 7Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Inquiry details• One participant said it’s not clear what is

actionable and what isn’t, e.g., he would expect to be able to tap on the traveler’s email address.

Page 8Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Reply template• There were no issues with this screen during

the initial reply.

• However, when asked to subsequently send or change a quote and/or payment request, there was a bit of hesitation. All participants selected “default available,” which loads the default message saying the property is available for the requested dates. (It works and the message can be changed, but it wasn’t as smooth as desired.)

“I should be able to click on the quote and see an option to edit the quote or send a payment request.”

Page 9Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Request payment & quote• All participants readily noticed the options

to request a payment and quote.

Page 10Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Review quote• There were no issues reviewing the quote,

selecting edit, adding a payment request or attaching the quote to the message.

• There was a bit of confusion about removing a quote, e.g., if they hadn’t attached it yet, why would they need to remove it, especially since they could easily cancel the page.

• If the dates and number of guests are updated, and the new quote is saved and sent, and then the user returns to this screen (or goes to the payment request screen), the original quote (dates, number of guests and amount) are shown.

Recommendation:

• Only show the Remove option if users edit the attachment, not when they are first setting up the quote.

• Make sure changes are saved and shown if users return to this screen.

Page 11Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Edit dates• When asked to extend the length of the

stay, participants selected the check out date, expecting to change just that date. But tapping on a later date changes the check in date.

• Note that if users edit and save the quote, but choose not to attach it, or if they attach it and then remove it, the updated quote isn’t saved. While this scenario wasn’t tested, this might be unexpected and confusing.

Recommendations:

• Allow users to change the check in and check out dates independently, depending on which they tap, or show one calendar graphic so users don’t think they can change just one date.

• It seems that if a new quote is saved, it should be saved, regardless of whether users choose to attach it.

Page 12Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Edit guests• Two of the four participants said they

wouldn’t know to edit the quote in order to change the number of guests.

“It’s kind of buried and not where I expect or need it.”

• One participant didn’t notice the arrow pointing to the right next to “Guests” and “Feeds & Discounts.”

Recommendations:

• Make the arrow a bit stronger, more contrast.

Page 13Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Change number of guests• If users change the number of guests, but

not the dates, they see this message when they attach the new quote.

Recommendations:

• Display an appropriate message reflecting what users actually did.

Page 14Mobile Quote & Payment Request Usability Test Results | January 2015

Review payment schedule• There were no issues changing the payment

schedule.

• Two participants were fine with logging into the dashboard in order to do more advanced edits of the payment schedule; two weren’t.

“Oh that stinks. By the time I log in, I forget what what I want to do.”

“The happy path meets my expectations, but…”

• Similar to the issue with removing a quote, if users edit the payment schedule, but choose not to attach it, or if they attach it and then remove it, the updated schedule isn’t saved. However, because there’s not an explicit save action, this doesn’t seem like it will result in as much confusion.

• Question: if users log in and do more advanced edits to the payment schedule, will the work they’ve done in the app be reflected online? Is there a seamless way to return to the app to continue replying in the app with the changes made online?