Wiigo
Enabling group travelers to plan trips collaboratively while reducing conflict.
Deliverables
High-fi web prototype
Context
Experience Design Course
My role
Contributed to all parts of web
Designed mobile individually
Overview
Problem
​
In my Experience Design course during Spring 2021, we were tasked with designing an end-to-end experience which would be situated within the context of a real or fictitious organization. A central feature of the end product had to deliver an information experience in the context of a product or service.​
​
Goal
​
My group decided to improve the group travel planning process by developing an end-to-end product and information experience.
​
​
Outcome
​
Wiigo is a web (and soon to be mobile) trip planning platform that allows groups members to discuss, vote, and decide on the activities they would like to do at their travel destination. After the team decides on a number of activities, they are also able to develop a day-by-day itinerary using Wiigo, which provides them suggestions for optimizing their time, transportation, and budget.
"A trip means different things to everyone".
How might we manage expectations and facilitate collaboration amongst travel group members who have different budgets and interests?
Final Pitch & Prototype
Process
Research
Define
Ideate
Prototype
Test
Pain points
Research Methods
-
8 In-depth user interviews
-
Competitive analysis
Insights
"I don't want to miss out on anything... but I also want to be spontaneous."
"I used 5 different surveys and voting just to decide where our group wanted to travel to"
-
Travelers use an incredible amount of physical and digital resources to discover what to do at their trip destination, resulting in a browser with many tabs open at once.
-
Travelers have a difficult time managing the opinions and preferences of group members.
-
Some group members prefer to let someone else plan their trip, while others take on the burden of planning the whole trip for the group. This can lead to feelings of resentment and frustration.
-
Travelers want the perfect balance between planning and spontaneity.
User personas
Fresh
Competitive/Market Analysis
Inspirock
Pros: Users can browse pre-made travel plans made by others and plan activities using their calendar.
​
Cons: Not collaborative for large groups.
Wanderlog
Pros: Search and browse activities at the destination, create day-by-day itinerary with notes.
​
Cons: No collaborative features other than real-time edits. No prices included in the plan.
Guides by Lonely Planet
Pros: Great for finding guides, tours, activities, and tickets.
​
Cons: Not collaborative for large groups, no itinerary building.
TripIt
Pros: Add all trip information including plane tickets, hotel, transportation, and activities to gather plan in one location.
​
Cons: Not "exploratory" - only for organization
Problem Statement
Managing different budgets, interests, and personalities is very difficult when planning large group trips. This often results in conflict or resentment between group members.
How might we help create a delightful and satisfactory trip when people have different preferences on what to do?
How might we help travelers make sure they don't miss out on all the "good stuff"?
How might we help travelers optimize their travel plan to find the most suitable activities, best use of their time, and best routes?
How might we help travelers organize their activities and other relevant information?
How might we facilitate travelers in stumbling upon unplanned adventures or sponteneity?
Ideation
Process
4 ideas each x 5 group members = 20 concepts
Discuss & group by similarity
Vote & narrow to single concept
Feature-level sketches to address "how might we" questions show above
Vote and condense critical features to a single flow
Prototype
Using our separate sketches, we condensed them into a single Figma prototype. We diverged the flow into two iterations with different collaboration features to test which ones were preferred by our users.
Flow 1
Highly collaborative, but less flexible
-
Choose individual favorite activities
-
Uses a group average for budget and number of days spent at destination to determine how many activities to narrow down to
-
Group discussion and voting sessions to narrow down activities
-
Drag activities to final itinerary
-
If one of your favorites was not selected by the group, you can add it back to your own itinerary
.png)
Flow 2
Less collaborative when choosing activities, but more individual flexibility
​
-
Add activities to your own calendar or group calendar
-
All activities transferred to "itinerary" stage
-
Drag and drop activities to a group plan or an individual plan
-
Discuss via commenting on the activities
-
No budget feature, only "total cost" at the end of the flow
-
AI optimization for routes + nearby activities
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
Concept Testing
User testing provided the following insights:
​
-
Users preferred selecting their own activities and voting rather than everyone adding their own activities
-
Users appreciated the voting feature because they had used a similar process in their own planning using iMessage or Google Forms
-
Users enjoyed that the platform would push group members who are less involved in the planning to give their input
-
Users enjoyed the drag and drop feature to build their itinerary
-
Users preferred the ability to chat to advocate for their favorite activities rather than via comments on activities
-
They still wanted the ability to save activities outside the group if their activity wasn't chosen by the group
-
They wanted a "best routes" features and activities close in location
-
A way to connect to iCalendar, Google calendar, or export as PDF
Iteration
Design System
Combine preferred features from testing into a single flow
.png)
.png)
Final Design