Registration Process Redesign
A UX DESIGN CASE STUDY

A UX DESIGN CASE STUDY
Lead UX Designer
Entain ( Ladbrokes, Coral , Betboo, Bwin etc )
6 Months
The current address manual entry system had an abandonment rate of approximately 27% of users, who fail to complete registration upon reaching the third step. Additionally, the current system’s three-step process leads users to mistakenly start entering their phone number instead of their address. During our kickoff meeting, we identified the following objectives:
Project goals:
We reviewed several platforms, including Paddy Power, Bet365, William Hill, and Amazon, to analyze how they handled the address entry process. The focus was on their use of auto-complete, error messages, and region-specific fields to minimize user errors and improve the registration experience.
Findings:
I conducted an industry best practise review, and the results highlights the importance of region-specific address formats and the use of auto-complete functionality to reduce input time and errors.
Recommendations based on my research includes:
User tests were conducted across multiple regions, including Spain, Germany, Belgium, the UK, and Canada. I aimed to identify user difficulties in completing the address finder during registration.
Findings:
We created user journey maps to visualize the end-to-end experience for users registering on the platform. This process helped us identify key pain points and opportunities for improvement in the address finder tool.
After completing our research, we organized a brainstorming session to identify key areas for improvement and generate possible solutions. During this process, we used affinity mapping to group and prioritize pain points into two categories:
We then used the card sorting method to prioritize the most critical problems to address first.
Common problems ( in order of priority )
Local Problems:
Once the pain points were prioritized, we moved into the brainstorming solution ideas, focusing on developing solutions for the top-priority problems.
Solutions for Common problems:
Solutions for Local Problems:
These solutions were selected for further development, prototyping, and testing.
After ideation, we transitioned into the Wireframing & Prototyping stage. During this phase, we translated the generated solutions into tangible designs to address the prioritized problems.
We created low-fidelity wireframes to visualize the structure and layout of the proposed solutions, focusing on:
Once the wireframes were finalized, we developed high-fidelity prototypes to simulate the user experience:
The prototypes were tested with real users to gather feedback and iterate the designs, ensuring the proposed solutions effectively solved the identified pain points.
After finalizing the prototypes and conducting user testing, the refined design solutions were implemented. The Address Finder Improvement project delivered measurable results:
Key Outcomes:
During the development and implementation of the Address finder tool, several challenges emerged:
Cultural differences in address formats: Different countries have unique address structures, which made it hard to design a solution that worked everywhere.
Confusing error messages: During the initial user tests, users struggled with unclear error messages, leading to incomplete or incorrect address submissions.
Technical limitations: The backend systems had constraints, which made it difficult to implement advanced features like geolocation and auto-complete.
Testing across regions: It was challenging to test the solution in multiple countries due to varying requirements and formats.
Balancing automation and manual entry: Users needed both automated address suggestions and manual input options, which had to be balanced in the design.