Priority 1
Users lose interest because redeeming points takes too long, especially once they reach checkout. The process needs to be shorter.
My Role
Contributed to redesigning the membership rewards checkout experience across web and mobile, collaborating with cross-functional teams from research to final UI.
Identifying the Problem
During end-to-end usability testing of the gift card discovery experience, we found that users were taking too long
to complete checkout after selecting a gift card, and sometimes abandoning the flow.
To investigate further, we conducted qualitative research
We focused solely on checkout tasks, focusing on where they hesitated, repeated actions, or dropped off. Those observations were synthesized into three UX artifacts.
Used empathy mapping to understand user behaviors, thoughts, and emotional friction points.
Personas were created to represent primary user behaviors and pain points across the checkout journey.
Mapped the end-to-end journey to identify where users drop off and align stakeholders on the key friction points.
Key Friction Points
These insights highlighted the breakdowns that were contributing to drop-off.
Priority 2
Users don't know how many steps sit between checkout and a completed transaction. They delay, assuming they will have more time later.
Priority 3
Users cannot move between steps to review information before placing an order. Getting back to the first step means four Back clicks, then four Next clicks to return.
One more thing before jumping into the designs
Competitive analysis
A look at one of Amex's biggest competitors: Bank of America's points redemption journey, on mobile and on the web.
My Observations
What works
- The flow is broken into manageable steps, making it easier for users to follow and complete the redemption process without feeling overwhelmed.
- Key actions (e.g., selection, confirmation) are clearly highlighted, giving users confidence that their inputs are being registered.
- Screens follow a predictable structure, reducing the learning curve and allowing users to navigate with minimal friction.
- Important steps like reviewing points, confirming selections, and final success states are clearly emphasized, helping prevent errors.
- The success screen provides a clear sense of completion, reinforcing that the transaction was successful.
What breaks down
- The transition between mobile and desktop flows feels inconsistent, requiring users to adapt to different interaction patterns.
- The flow spans multiple screens for what should be a quick, repeatable action — increasing time and effort.
- Frequent users are forced through the same linear process instead of being able to skip or accelerate steps.
- Not all screens clearly prioritize primary actions, making it harder to quickly identify what to do next.
Amex’s Existing Experience
The existing flow is fragmented across multiple steps, so people had to navigate forward and backward to review what they already entered.
Exploring Two Design Paths
Enhance the existing experience
Keep the same architecture and improve the pages that already exist. Low effort. Medium impact.
- A step indicator makes progress visible
- Smaller hierarchy changes reduce some friction
- Faster to implement with the current architecture
- Returning users have little new to learn
Trade-offs
- The core flow stays fragmented
- Repeated inputs and context switching remain
- Limited effect on drop-off
- Usability improves, and the confidence problem stays
Reimagine checkout
Change the checkout architecture and reimagine the experience. High effort. High impact.
- Steps combine, so people stop jumping between pages
- The selected card, points, and summary stay in one place
- Visibility and feedback raise confidence
- The path from start to completion is guided
Driving Alignment with Stakeholders
The proposed solution faced concerns around implementation effort and complexity. I focused on building alignment around the design's potential and securing approval for A/B testing.
Validating the Direction
Both directions were validated with A/B testing. Option 2 showed stronger potential across three KPIs measured.
Users completed tasks faster, with fewer pauses and less backtracking.
Drop-offs decreased once steps were simpler and transitions were fewer.
Users reported higher confidence and clarity.
Key Takeaways
Engineering raised real concerns about implementation complexity. Product saw strong value in Option 2. Grounding the discussion in the test data and the user need is what got everyone onto the higher-impact direction.