Omkar More
All work

Car Wizz

A car-buying app that recommends by personal need, from the first search to the test drive, financing and delivery.

Digital
Type
Independent case study
Brief
E-commerce app for a car dealership
Duration
6 weeks
Platform
Mobile app
Industry
Car retail
Role
Solo designer
The Car Wizz app on a phone
  • 6 weeksSolo sprintResearch to prototype
  • 5Competitors auditedFour direct, one marketplace
  • 29Candidate featuresEleven in the value proposition
  • 5Prototype flowsFirst tap to delivery
On this page
  1. A car-buying app that recommends
  2. The problem
  3. Research plan
  4. Competitive audit
  5. Design journey
  6. Value proposition
  7. Decisions
  8. Not yet tested
  9. Takeaway
  10. Product walkthrough

A car-buying app that recommends

Car Wizz is a mobile app for buying a car from a dealership. It recommends cars by personal need, then carries the buyer through the test drive, financing, payment and delivery.

The brief was to design an e-commerce app for a car dealership. I worked on it alone over a six-week sprint: user research and a competitive audit first, then user flows, wireframes and prototypes.

The problem

Marko is a tech-heavy and busy executive who needs a recommendation for a reliable second car with the best offer from nearby trusted dealers, because he has limited time to test drive and make the right buying choice for his family.

He gets annoyed when there are too many car options, no reliable information about a trusted dealer, and no clear availability for test driving.

What I set out to learn

Show the processResearch plan

Before any interview I set the goals, the people to talk to, and twelve questions about how people decide on a car.

Interview goals

  • Understand the common challenges people face when deciding on a car purchase.
  • Identify the frustrations of buying or choosing a car from a dealer.
  • Understand where the knowledge behind a choice comes from.
  • Understand a car buyer’s challenges in light of their own needs.

Who to talk to

  • Ages 18 to 55, living in metropolitan or suburban areas.
  • People who buy from dealers, for a first or second car, new or used.
  • Different genders, and people with disabilities.

Competitive audit

Show the processCompetitive audit

I audited five car-buying sites in Finland, four direct competitors and one marketplace, on first impressions, interaction, visual design and content. Accessibility was rated poor on all five.

Nettiauto

A direct competitor and a centralised platform for buying cars across the country, for individuals and businesses.

Strengths

  • A large database with decent information
  • Multiple filters and a comparison option
  • Easy navigation and a simple, direct flow
  • Direct contact by email

Gaps

  • A complicated, information-heavy page with too many options
  • No recommendations, and no reviews or ratings for dealers
  • No saving options and no payment options
  • Very limited accessibility consideration

Four steps, repeated

Show the processDesign journey

Four steps from the brief to a prototype. Pick one to see what I did.

Value proposition

Based on the user findings, the persona and the problem statement, these eleven features made the value proposition.

  • A single place for notifications across the state, with subscriptions for better offers
  • A dashboard for the buyer’s own cars, with details such as the next service
  • An online buy option with easy payment
  • Better financing offers every day, with an easy swap between financing companies
  • Recommendations on nearby cars with offers, based on what the buyer needs
  • Test drive booking in the app, with a notification when a new slot is free
  • Online documentation saved on the profile, for an easier purchase
  • The reliability of a car and a dealer highlighted in every ad
  • Profile verification for all users and dealers
  • Support and a single contact point for emergencies
  • After the purchase, a way to buy insurance, pay taxes and add gadgets

Three decisions behind the flow

The choices that shaped the app, and what each one costs. This is an independent case study, so these are design decisions, not shipped outcomes.

  1. Recommend by need, not by filter

    What we chose
    Ask what the buyer needs first, then recommend cars.
    What it cost
    The buyer answers questions before seeing a single car, which a search box does not ask.
    What followed
    The competitive audit found heavy pages with many options and no recommendations.
  2. Book the test drive inside the flow

    What we chose
    Keep the step from a shortlisted car to a test drive in the same app.
    What it cost
    The app depends on dealer availability being current.
  3. Financing and delivery in the app

    What we chose
    Carry the buyer from the first search through financing to delivery in one place.
    What it cost
    A longer flow to design and to explain, with more places where a buyer could stop.

What is not yet known

This prototype has not been through a usability study.

I audited five competitors and planned twelve interview questions, then designed and prototyped the flow. I have no outcome numbers and I do not claim any. A short test with five people on the prototype is the next step.

What I took from it

What this taught me about agents

A recommendation is one of the first things people hand to software.

  • It earns trust when the buyer can see what the recommendation was based on.
  • I have not tested this in Car Wizz. It is the first question I would test.

Product walkthrough

Five stages, from the first tap to delivery. The clip plays the prototype. Press a screen to open it full size.

It’s easy to start

Onboarding gets easier with quick signup and sign-in options. In the days of social media, that adds a choice of connections and a quick start. Top picks from your search history, new tips and tricks are right on the front desk.