The customer journey | Nathan Allen

The hesitation between one step and the next

Someone can be interested in hearing aids and still feel unsure about what happens next. Completing a questionnaire, answering an unfamiliar number, and showing up for an appointment each ask for a different kind of commitment.

I approached those moments as one connected experience. The business needed more people to move through the journey. The customer needed understandable questions, reassurance, and a clear expectation of what they were agreeing to.

Start with confidence, then ask for commitment

The questionnaire work began with competitor analysis and the needs of our audience. I increased the font size, made the design more familiar, and rearranged questions into a sequence that made more sense. More difficult questions moved later, once people had more context.

I introduced educational moments between questions to answer concerns and explain the product. These were also useful pauses in a repetitive form. Additional qualifying questions helped the team route leads more appropriately.

The constraint was balancing completion with usefulness. A shorter questionnaire that left the phone team with less information would simply move the problem downstream.

01UnderstandReadable questions, useful context
02ReassureExplain the call and the next step
03PrepareA tangible reminder of the appointment

Reconstructed process summary based on the project materials.

Trust Questionnaire opening page with illustrated answer cards — Actual Trust Questionnaire prototype, opening state.

Trust Questionnaire asking whether the visitor already wears hearing aids — Actual prototype, the next question with a privacy reminder.

More ways to earn trust before the next question

The later questionnaire explorations make reassurance part of the interface. Trust Questionnaire pairs illustrated answer cards with a no-risk-trial message and recognition badges. Its opening screen also explains the three steps ahead, so the first answer has a clearer context.

The supplied prototype moves from the illustrated choice into short, focused questions with a privacy reminder. The Trust and illustrated screens below are later design artifacts, not the experiment behind the historical completion results in this case study.

Trust Questionnaire mobile opening screen with Me and Someone Else choices — Trust Questionnaire: illustrated choices and recognition at the first decision.

Illustrated questionnaire showing Someone Else selected — Illustrated alternative: the selected answer and transition state.

The confirmation page had another job to do

Finishing the questionnaire was not the end of the experience. We needed people to recognize the incoming call and be ready for a useful conversation.

I added the number they should expect, explained the next steps, and included testimonial videos. Then we asked whether they would be ready to answer a call within 15 minutes. That response gave the team a practical way to prioritize calls and gave customers a specific expectation.

The work connected interface design to the team’s follow-up process. It was a reminder that a successful screen has to make sense to the people operating the service as well as the people using it.

Original confirmation-page presentation. The experience explains the next step before the call arrives.

Make the appointment tangible

There could still be a gap between scheduling and attending. We created an appointment package with imitation hearing aids, a founder’s message, product information, and a reminder people could put on the fridge.

The small physical sample helped communicate device size in a way a screen could not. The reminder kept the appointment visible, while the supporting material explained what to expect. Each item had a job beyond making the package look nice.

Original appointment-package design and presentation.

What changed

My original project notes reported a 20% increase in questionnaire completions and an 80% improvement in call pickup rate. The appointment package was associated with a 15% reduction in no-shows and a 10% increase in trial starts.

These are historical, project-reported results. The original notes do not include the testing windows, sample sizes, or statistical analysis, so they should be read as reported directional outcomes rather than independently verified causal estimates. They do not describe the newer Piper experiments.

Questionnaire completions: +20%
Call pickup rate: +80%
Appointment no-shows: −15%

What I take forward

Useful reassurance belongs where someone is hesitating. It might be a clearer question, an expected phone number, or a physical reminder. Adding more content everywhere would have missed the point.

Looking back, I would document the experiment windows and downstream definitions more carefully. I would also make sure any processing animation reflects actual work, rather than relying on a delay to imply personalization. Confidence should come from a truthful, useful experience.