Teamo Capstone

In my senior spring semester of 2024 at Tufts University, my three capstone team members and I were tasked with improving the user experience for Teamo customers over 14 weeks. Teamo is a TaskRabbit and IKEA collaborated delivery service.

  • Phase One is made up of our initial research on the customers, the current market, and the paint points in the current delivery process under Teamo.

  • Phase Two includes the synthesizing of our data found in the initial research stages and finding opportunities for improvement.

  • Phase Three includes the selection of the opportunities we decided to work on as well as our design and testing phases.

  • This project concludes with potential next steps for Teamo.

Final Products

  1. Teamo Informational Delivery Poster

A fast, clearly defined process for booking delivery

2. Service Choice Assignment

A vehicle assignment solution with a few simple questions

3. Delivery Window Interface

A redesigned selection method for delivery date and time

Phase One: Research

For our initial research, our team decided to compare other delivery platforms to Teamo as well as conduct interviews with customers who have utilized furniture delivery prior. Perhaps the most important step of this phase was the journey maps we created before and after visiting IKEA and going through the customer’s journey ourselves there.

Initial Interviews

Our team conducted informal conversational interviews with family and friends who have utilized furniture delivery services prior.

We found that…

  • Interviewees would pay for furniture assembly in the future if it was cheaper

  • Most interviewees do not like assembling furniture themselves

  • Some interviewees regretted buying the basic option for furniture delivery as it put more work on themselves

Our team conducted a competitive analysis on furniture delivery, the gig-economy, and general delivery applications and websites.

We found that…

  • Other furniture delivery services are limited to certain days for one’s items to ship

  • Choosing specific room delivery for furniture delivery depends on price and ability to independently do so

  • The right service choice must be abundantly clear in the gig economy (ex. with Uber, vehicle choice depends mainly on the number of people which is clear in their display)

Competitive Analysis

Initial Journey Map

When creating our initial journey map, our team decided to fill in what we knew about the customer’s journey when going to IKEA and utilizing Teamo for delivery. After creating this journey map, we identified the gaps in our knowledge and potential pain points that we could analyze in the customer’s journey once we visited IKEA and utilized their delivery services ourselves.

What We Learned

  1. The largest gaps in our knowledge were during the time period after the customer chose Teamo for delivery and was waiting for their item to arrive

  2. There may be certain situations that make or break the customer’s journey when using Teamo such as language differences between customers and coworkers

IKEA Trip

Upon going to IKEA, our team went through the customer’s journey by going through the store, finding our desired item, and then going to the delivery desk to have this desk delivered to one of our homes. After having this item delivered, we went back into the store and talked to customers about their understanding of IKEA’s delivery options. We asked them why they choose delivery when they buy furniture or why they do not. We also observed the store to see how delivery was advertised and how it was promoted by coworkers, the IKEA workers.

The TaskRabbit delivery in the IKEA store we visited had limited advertising and coworker promotion of the service which hindered customers’ knowledge of their delivery options.

What We Learned

The delivery desk is a make-or-break process in the customer journey as the coworkers may have limited knowledge of how to help the customer with TaskRabbit/Teamo delivery and the process of going from one’s device back to paper forms may make the delivery journey complicated.

Delivery options were not clearly defined for customers as the customers had to choose the delivery truck themselves without being informed of what truck option would be best for their delivery.

Revisited Journey Map

After conducting our initial journey map and visiting IKEA, our team decided to revisit our original journey map and fill in any gaps in the process that we now understood after visiting IKEA and being Teamo customers ourselves. We mapped out our personal experiences and our own emotions surrounding the visit to IKEA.

Phase Two: Ideation

After weeks of research, our team entered phase two in which we synthesized our findings and ideated what opportunities we could select to help aid in improving the Teamo customer’s experience.

Selected Opportunities

1

Design a poster that outlines the process to customers upon arrival at the delivery desk

2

Design a method for the service choice to be assigned to the customer 


3

Design a delivery window interface that simplifies choices for customers


Rough draft of potential informational display regarding Teamo delivery

Initial Ideas: Process Outline

After our experience at IKEA, we thought customers might be frustrated at the vague delivery process at the delivery desk in IKEA.

To combat this problem, we thought to create a simple 2-3 step display to set the process expectation for the customer.

Initial Ideas: Assigning Service Choice

The problem we were working with was customers at IKEA did not know which vehicle to choose for their furniture delivery. In addition to this confusion, customers may also focus on gaming the system and choosing a service choice that is cheaper but is not the correct one for their delivery needs. If a customer chooses a smaller vehicle because it is cheaper, the delivery driver cannot complete the order which negatively affects all parties.

We believed the service choice step should be as seamless and simple as possible. Thus, we came up with the solution to assign the correct vehicle to the customer by asking them a few questions about their delivery. This way, customers will not have information they do not need, and they will not have the incentive to game the system.

Teamo service choice selection screen

Original Teamo delivery window interface

Initial Ideas: Simplified Delivery Windows

The original version of delivery window screens had a limited date selection, no connection between price tiers, and no way to guide customers toward an optimal window for the company.

Thus, we came up with the solution to attempt to create an easy way for customers to select a range of delivery dates, see time windows available, and price differences.

Phase Three:

Product Development

After choosing three opportunities to work towards, we created initial prototypes, tested these prototypes, and discussed our concepts with participants to craft our final products.

Testing Plan: Process Outline

Testing Objective

Create a minimal poster layout that portrays the delivery process easily to customers.

Step 1

Create poster design in Figma


Step 2

Have participants look at the poster and describe their understanding of the process.


Step 3b

Ask follow-up questions to determine confusing/essential poster elements 

First Process Outline Prototype

Participant Details

Number of Participants: 12

Convenience sample of family and friends

What We Learned

Step 3a

Ask follow-up questions to determine gaps in what the poster portrays 

Step 4

Refine poster based off of feedback

  • Participants want to make sure that this service is a trusted delivery service.

  • Participants need to know immediately by looking at the poster that the poster will guide them through the delivery.

  • Participants enjoyed the numbering of steps as it made the process seem very simple.

  • Some participants needed additional context of what the delivery process entailed apart from the three steps shown.

Benefits to Customers

  • Customers are given the choice of a new delivery option

  • Enables customers to complete the booking process faster

  • Customers receive furniture faster and for a cheaper price

Final Process Outline Poster 

Benefits to Teamo

  • Increases the number of customers utilizing Teamo’s services

  • The process requires less IKEA co-worker interaction

Testing Plan: Service Choice Assignment

Testing Objective

Create question flows that determine which service choice is right for the customer

Lead at least 80% of the participants to the right service choice

Ask as few questions as possible

Step 1

Create three potential question groupings that can be asked of participants when deciding their correct service choice

Step 2

Create Qualtrics surveys from these question groupings for participants to complete


Step 4

Record and watch whether the participant answers all questions correctly to come to the correct service choice for their individual delivery

Examples of Initial Questions Groupings Tested Through Qualtrics Surveys

“You have two items that need to be delivered from IKEA to your home. Both of your items are assembled. One of the boxes is four feet long while the other is eight feet long. You need this order delivered to your apartment on the fifth floor of your condo building. Your building does have an elevator, and you are not willing to help your driver carry the order.”

What We Learned

Step 3

Assign different delivery orders to participants and record what is the right service choice for that customer profile (ex: one participant may have three boxes and one assembled item in their delivery order

Step 5

Conduct user feedback post-survey 


Testing Profile Example

Participant Details

Number of Participants: 12 (3 for each question web)

Convenience sample of family and friends

Preferably those who have experienced furniture delivery

  • There was confusion about the term “assembled” when asking if a participant’s items were assembled or not assembled.

  • We should avoid asking what floor the order is being delivered to since it does not change the amount paid to the delivery driver. Participants also were worried about this step and tried to game the system so they would not be charged extra.

  • Participants did not like choosing between a range of boxes for their order. They believed it added a step in their heads rather than choosing a specific number of boxes in their order.

Final Decision Web 

Final Service Choice Screens 

Benefits to Teamo

  • The process will require less IKEA co-worker interaction

  • Deliveries will have a higher success rate

  • Teamo will receive better reviews for their simple process, leading to more customers

Benefits to Customers

  • The new process is simple and fast, asking at most five questions to the customer

  • Increase in accurate service assignments will lead to more successful deliveries and happier customers

Testing Plan: Delivery Window Interface

Testing Objective

Produce a delivery window interface that is intuitive for the participants and not overwhelming while still showing multiple options for delivery date, time window, and price.

Step 1

Conduct a usability test on participants to perform specific tasks on the delivery window interface

Step 2

Ask participants follow-up qualitative questions regarding their performance on the tasks and their overall thoughts of the interface

Step 4

Conduct second round of testing if needed

First Prototypes of Delivery Window Interface for Testing

What We Learned

Benefits to Customers

  • Faster and more precise delivery options are available that fit into the customer’s schedule

  • The streamlined design allows for a good user experience, avoiding cognitive overload

  • Price options may foster a sense of autonomy over final charge

Step 3

Consider the feedback when redesigning

Final Prototype of Delivery Window Interface

Benefits to Teamo

  • Narrower, wider, and standard delivery windows allow for profit maximization

  • Varying time windows create flexibility in the booking schedule of drivers

  • Standardizing a company-optimal time window influences customers to choose it

Participant Details

Number of Participants: 12

Convenience sample of family and friends

  • Allowing a participant to pick the date of their delivery before the time window of delivery matches the participant’s mental model.

  • Highlighting the standard time window made it clear to participants that this window was the default.

  • Participants preferred the price of delivery be listed rather than the savings they would receive.

Conclusion

Increasing awareness of Teamo’s delivery process in stores, assigning service choices to customers, and upgrading the delivery window interfaces enables an inexpensive, fast, and stress-free customer experience.

1

Increase and test advertisement visibility in stores

Next Steps

2

Calculate the exact combination of assembled and packaged items that correspond to each service vehicle

3

Study the effects of altering delivery window sizes as well as the “standardization” of specific time windows

Next

SeeDegree UX Design Project