PROJECT OVERVIEW
The innovation team was tasked with creating a proof of concept (POC) for a unified search service—a product designed to give customers a seamless way to search across internal and external platforms.
users currently struggle with fragmented, inconsistent search experiences that waste time, cause frustration, and erode trust in results. Without a reliable, company-wide search solution, many default to external tools like Google—risking lost insights and lowered productivity.
What’s breaking down in our users’ native search journeys?
Could a unified search service finally solve these pain points and empower customers?
To explore this, I led research around three strategic aims:
🎯 Understand User Search Behaviors
Deeply uncover how customers currently search and where they face challenges.
🎯 Validate the Need for Unified Search
Confirm whether a seamless, cross-platform search solves real user problems.
🎯 Shift Focus to User-Centered Design
Move the team’s mindset from competitor benchmarking to solving authentic customer needs.
Budget
$1m
Team
Lead UX Researcher, 1 UX Designer
2 Product Owners, 1 Sr. Business Lead
Timeline
4 weeks
Research Goals & Approach
We used a two-pronged research approach to map customers’ native search journeys, uncover unmet needs, and ensure the product direction was driven by users — not competitors.
RG1: Discover users’ behaviors, experiences, and patterns during their native search across multiple platforms.
RG2: Assess whether a unified search capability across company products fulfills a real user need.
RG3:Identify the reasons previous internal search solutions have failed, including product reach, placement, and content issues.
🌱 DISCOVERY
Stakeholder Interviews
Requirements Gathering
🧠 DESIGN THINKING
Affinity Map
🔬 RESEARCH
8 1:1 Interviews
Facilitation Guide
Surveys
Thematic Analysis
💡 SOLUTION DESIGN
Process Flow Map
Internal & External Stakeholder Presentations
⚙️Process | 📦 Artifacts ▸
Intent
Investigate overlapping and divergent user search journeys to reveal where experiences aligned, conflicted, or broke down, providing clarity on what was actually happening for customers.
⚙️ Conducted stakeholder interviews and requirements-gathering sessions to capture perspectives and surface gaps, revealing patterns and priorities in users’ search experiences.
📦 Affinity Map v0
⚙️Process | 📦 Artifacts ▸
Intent
Organized stakeholder insights into patterns and prepared research artifacts to guide user interviews and uncover deeper customer needs.
⚙️ Synthesized stakeholder insights into an affinity map to reveal gaps, overlaps, and alignment across user search journeys.
📦 Affinity Map
⚙️Process | 📦 Artifacts ▸
Intent
Building on insights from stakeholder interviews and affinity mapping, I used a mixed-methods approach to gather user feedback. Interviews captured detailed search behaviors, while a short survey validated themes and patterns at scale.
⚙️ Conducted 8 semi-structured 1:1 candidate interviews to validate the gaps in the affinity map. Follow-up surveys gathered qualitative and quantitative feedback.
⚙️ Applied thematic analysis to synthesize insights, revealing recurring patterns, pain points, and unmet needs in users’ native search journeys.
📦 Facilitation Guide, Survey, Thematic Analysis
⚙️Process | 📦 Artifacts ▸
Intent
Synthesized research into a final process flow that revealed short- and long-term opportunities across users’ search journeys. This showcased UX Research’s strategic role in shaping product direction and cross-platform search strategy.
⚙️ Led internal and external presentations to translate research findings into actionable insights. Developed a high-level process flow to guide solution design and align the team on next steps for the unified search service.
📦 Process Flow Map, Presentations
Challenges
Teams were focused on competitors, not users.
User search data was fragmented and unclear.
Reframed the problem to prioritize real user pain points and validate the need for a unified search solution.
Synthesized diverse insights to reveal patterns, gaps, and high-priority opportunities.
''
I can’t always tell which results are relevant, so I end up wasting time or just giving up and going to Google when I’m in a rush.
– Candidate 7
Key Discoveries
Insight
Solution
Impact
Search Behavior Patterns & Motivators
Insight 1: Users start searching broadly, fueled by client inquiries. They iteratively narrow searches based on experience and trust. ▸
- Familiarity with the application guides search behavior.
- Trust in results is never absolute; users continuously assess relevance.
Solution 1: Guide users from broad to narrow searches with contextual cues. Build trust and reduce friction. ▸
- Simplify interface to reduce cognitive load.
- Provide contextual cues and trust signals to guide iterative refinement.
Impact
Increased early engagement
Reduced abandonment
Higher completion rates
Search Refinement & Relevancy
Insight 2: Users struggle to judge relevancy mid-search. Without clear cues, they abandon the process under time pressure. ▸
- Users don’t know immediately which results are relevant.
- Lack of clarity leads to abandonment.
- Time pressure accelerates drop-off.
Solution 2: Surface strong signals and refinement mid-search; prevent abandonment. ▸
- Highlight top results to help users quickly judge relevance.
- Provide rapid refinement paths(filters, smart suggestions).
- Reduce uncertainty with cues that prevent drop-off.
Impact
Reduced mid-search abandonment
Increased confidence in results
Higher search efficiency
Searching Under Time Pressure
Insight 3: Time pressure drives users to rely on Google or intranets. They skip the internal search, risking critical resource gaps. ▸
- Time constraints prevent exploration of alternative workflows.
- Users rely on familiar tools (Google, intranets) for critical tasks.
Solution 3: Surface critical results quickly; Reduce friction, and integrate trusted resources. ▸
- Surface essential results immediately.
- Streamline workflows to minimize friction.
- Integrate trusted internal resources to prevent Google fallback.
Impact
Reduced search abandonment
Faster task completion
Increased usage of internal resources
Segmented User Needs
Insight 4: Within persona archetypes, subgroups have unique search needs. Overlooking them creates friction and limits adoption. ▸
They scan for:
- Subgroups have workflows that differ from the main persona.
- Overlooking these differences creates misaligned experiences.
Solution 4: Design for distinct subgroups; align features to their needs to improve search efficiency and adoption. ▸
- Align features to subgroup behaviors to reduce friction.
- Keep workflows consistent across platforms.
- Address overlooked needs to improve adoption and satisfaction.
Impact
Reduced search friction
Higher segment adoption
Improved cross-platform satisfaction
