.png)
Over 3 weeks, I reimagined Tripview from the ground up, using mixed-methods research to build an app that is faster to navigate and easier to organise, without losing sight of Tripview’s core timetabling strengths and product-market fit.
| ⚠️ What was broken | 🔨 What I built | 🔑 What it unlocked |
|---|---|---|
| Key actions were hard to find, and trip organisation felt heavier than it should. | Clarified the information architecture, strengthened discoverability cues, and streamlined trip and folder management. | A more readable, intuitive that stays true to Tripview’s timetabling strengths. |
Timeline:
3 weeks
Figma file:
https://www.figma.com/design/No4wUZXotyw6Qx5HC5NP7n/Tripview?node-id=217-17208&t=yAlYg7CemplJt4Fo-1
Role:
user research / high‑fidelity UI / interactive prototype / usability testing
Research:
32 survey responses /· 4 interviews / 4 user tests
Going into researching the problem, I formulated 3 key research questions (with 3 sub-questions under each one).
| What are users doing on Tripview? | Competitor understanding | Desires and pain points |
|---|---|---|
| • How often are they using it, and what for? |
• What are their typical journeys and goals?
• Are there different user archetypes and use cases? | • What other apps are being used, and what’s the split?
• Why do users choose Tripview or other apps?
• How do users find the experience and visuals? | • Anything users wish Tripview had?
• What are the key sources of frustration?
• How do users feel about monetisation? |
I used both qual and quant signals to understand Tripview user’s core usability problems, whilst mapping out the existing state of Tripview in parallel.
<aside> 📊
Survey (quant)
32 respondents · 22 questions
</aside>
<aside> 🗣️
Interviews (qual)
4 × 45‑min interviews
</aside>
<aside> 🧭
Flow mapping
Mapped key journeys to locate drop‑offs and confusion
</aside>
_(1).png)