UOPX · Design Lead

5 days to help students
find their future.

Find Your Path is a tool designed to help future students discover the best-fit degree programs that align with their interests. Students come to us with varying levels of understanding about their desired programs and career paths.

Role
Design Lead & Sprint Facilitator
Team
PMs, Engs, Marketing, Content Designer, SEO
Duration
5 days + 1 week testing
Tools
Figma, Validately, Miro
Process
Discovery > Design Sprint > Usability Test
Outcome
Boosted retention by 41%
Find Your Path tool overview
01

Business Goals

UOPX is developing a "Find Your Path" tool for phoenix.edu visitors to help them find degree programs that match their interests and skills. A 2019 survey found that 79% of future students need to understand career outcomes to feel comfortable selecting a degree program.

Team needs to gather qualitative data and insights to understand user needs, and identify the general strategy, direction, and value-added features for the tool. Then design and test a useful, easy-to-use "Find Your Path" tool.

Business goals overview
02

User Interview

I recruited future students from three personas provided by marketing:

Persona B - The Decided
  • Clearly knows the specific program and job they want
  • Wants to skip assessments and go straight to the program finder
Persona F - The Explorer
  • Has a general idea of the field of study and career area
  • Wants career-to-program matches without lengthy assessments
Persona J - The Lost
  • Unsure about both what to study and which career path to pursue
  • Prefers detailed assessments covering career, skills, interests
User persona comparison

Research method

I conducted a remote moderated study to gather qualitative data and user feedback on two of our tools and two competitor products.

Research Objectives: Identify user needs and pain points in selecting degree programs, careers, and universities. Explore Find Your Path (FYP) concepts and features to determine what resonates with future students and why, guiding FYP design.

We observed behaviors and asked probing questions, such as:

  • Would you start this tool as shown? Why or why not?
  • Would you stop before finishing? Where and why?
  • Which features resonate or don't resonate with you? Why?
  • What is clear or confusing about this tool?
  • On a 5-point scale, how helpful is the tool? (1=Not at all helpful; 3=Neutral; 5=Very helpful) Please explain.

Comparison: After exploring all concepts, we asked participants: Which concept resonates best with you? Which doesn't? Why? If you could pick any feature from any concept to create your ideal tool, what would you choose?

User research overview

Research findings

We received valuable and informative feedback from our users. I created and presented detailed findings and recommendations to stakeholders:

The Lost
  • Prefer detailed assessments covering career, skills, interests, and program matches
The Explorer
  • Want to see career-to-program matches instead of taking assessments
The Decided
  • Want to skip assessments and go straight to the program finder

Core insight: A single flow can't serve all three. The Decided wants to skip straight to program search. The Explorer wants career-to-program matching. The Lost needs a guided assessment. One tool, forked experiences.

Competitor tool — UOPX mobile Competitor tool — Purdue Global Competitor tool — concept exploration
Round-1 Insights — key takeaways presented to stakeholders
03

5 Days Design Sprint

With user needs identified, we now focus on business goals, product expectations, and solution feasibility. I invited key stakeholders (executives, PMs, POs, developers, SEO, Legal, SMEs) for a 5-day design sprint. We broke it into five parts: Mapping, Sketching, Deciding, Prototyping, and Testing.

  • Identify problems/goals and vote
  • Prioritize problems and vote
  • Explore solutions and vote
  • Make decisions and vote
  • Prototype and test

Participants (8-9 people): Facilitator: Me (designer). Experts (6): 1 researcher, 3 developers, 1 copywriter, 1 PM, 1 PO. Decision Makers (1-2).

Design sprint process map
Day 1
Map - Goals, questions, and HMW
10 mins
Long-term goal setting
Questions for the team: Why are we undertaking this project? Where do we want to be in six months, one year, or even five years from now? The image below shows the voting results, highlighting the top two long-term goals.
Long-term goal voting results
10 mins
Sprint questions
Questions for the team: How could we fail? What could go wrong? Translate fear into a yes/no question. The Sprint Questions posed by the team reveal the main concerns of our stakeholders:
  • Can our tool address users' main concerns?
  • Will our tool support prospective students effectively?
  • Can we maintain an easy-to-use UI/UX?
  • Can we provide accurate and useful information?
  • Can our data source meet customers' needs?
Sprint questions voting
60 mins
Ask the experts + HMW
Questions for the team: What do you think the FYP tool is? What does it do, and who uses it? What problem do you believe this tool is trying to solve? What should the product look like in 2 years? What would be the ideal situation?
The team raised and voted on the top "How Might We" (HMW) questions:
  • Create a fun and inviting tool to maximize engagement
  • Provide career info to address users' major pain points
  • Bridge skill gaps with relevant programs
  • Align the tool with employer needs (skills, job matches, top traits)
  • Offer customized paths for diverse users
  • Develop an ecosystem for users' long-term career growth
HMW voting results
45 mins
Note N Map
After the team set the goals and vision, they individually created high-level maps of the user (Persona B, F & J)'s current experience from start to goal achievement. Then, each participant presented their map, and the team voted and discussed the priority, importance, and feasibility for the new features and design.
Individual note maps Team note map voting
50 mins
Map + Target
The team began the following tasks together based on the previous takeaways:
  • Considered the top HMWs (business, product goals)
  • Merged all the top notes into the map
  • Discussed and removed notes with the lowest votes
  • The decision maker voted on the notes and made the final decision on the features and user flows
The team decided to focus on two user flows to fit different persona types (B, F, J):

1. Career Search (F, J)

For Explorers and the Lost who need guidance

2. Program Finder (B)

For the Decided who know what they want

Unified map with merged notes Final target map with two user flows
Day 2
Sketch - Lightning demos & concept creation
Based on the features and flows decided on Day 1, the team researched and sought out inspiring products and experiences, examining great solutions and capturing screenshots of their findings. These screenshots were then shared with the team for discussion and inspiration, fostering a collaborative environment aimed at generating innovative ideas and strategies.
Lightning demo inspirations
Day 3
Decide - Art Museum & feature selection
On Day 3, the team conducted the Art Museum activities based on the concepts created on Day 2. Here is the decision making process:
  • Silently reviewed all the concepts
  • Created a heatmap by adding little green dots to the ideas they liked
  • Conducted a speed critique
  • Held a straw poll
  • Decide
Here are the decided features for the two primary user flows. The team has left out some features for future versions after reconfirming their feasibility with the engineering team:

Program Finder

  • Filtering & sorting
  • Search bar
  • Program intro
  • Tuition of programs
  • Start date
  • Cost per credit
  • Program length
  • Education requested
  • Salary range from BLS
  • Career pathway
  • Skills

Career Assessment

  • Detailed assessment (2-4 mins)
  • Condensed assessment
  • Progress bar
  • Emoji and icons for fun
  • Top traits
  • Career matches
  • Projected growth
  • Career intro
  • Career pathway
Art museum concept review Dot voting heatmap
Speed critique session Straw poll voting Feature decision board Final feature decisions
Day 4
Prototype - Two high-fidelity prototypes
Two high-fi prototypes were created. I conducted a dry run with the interviewer and decision maker to identify mistakes and prepare for testing.
Day 5 + 1 Week
Test & Iterate
Usability testing with real users revealed targeted improvements needed for each flow:

Program Finder Iterations

  • Include quick facts such as cost, credits, and program length
  • Add icons or pictures for each program to enhance visual engagement
  • Implement autofill for the search bar

Career Assessment Iterations

  • Use direct, clear questions to avoid confusion
  • Add animated emojis in the assessment to make the UI more engaging and clearer
  • Shorten the text on the results page and use bullet points for clarity
04

Final Designs

Career/skill assessment tool samples:

Career assessment landing page Assessment question page Results page

Program finder sample:

Program finder desktop

Mobile samples:

Question page mobile Program finder mobile Results page mobile
05

What five days bought

Over the course of five intense days, we embarked on a design sprint that allowed us to rapidly progress from defining our goals to developing actionable solutions. We tackled problems head-on, explored innovative ideas, and meticulously organized and prioritized our findings.

Through collaborative mapping, sketching, and critique sessions, every team member's voice was heard, ensuring a unified vision before moving into the prototyping phase.

+41%
boost in retention
5 days
from problem to tested prototype
3
persona types served by forked flows
2
distinct user flows shipped

The real lesson: This sprint was not just about speed, but about aligning our efforts and leveraging our collective creativity to drive meaningful outcomes. The forked experience design (two distinct flows serving three persona types) would have taken months to negotiate through normal process. Five days of structured constraint forced decisions that committee meetings never would.

What's next

Let's close
a gap together.

I'm looking for teams where research drives the roadmap and design ships -- not just specs.

lin@linzhao.design