Unified Campaign Management
An updated ad campaign editing experience for Wayfair’s suppliers
Through survey feedback, user interviews, and usage data, several pain points with our previous advertising campaign management experience were unconvered. Resolving these pain points was determined to be a priority through the business KPI of Wayfair Advertising adoption and retention. Thus, the AXP (Advertising Experience) team set out to address the known issues and improve usability of the experience.
Pain Points
The main pain points we sought to address were:
-
Suppliers having a difficult time analysing their campaign performance.
-
Suppliers being unsure of how to turn analysis of their performance into optimization.
-
Suppliers not having a clear understanding of how advertising is affecting their business.
Among these pain points, we placed special emphasis upon improving our suppliers’ ability to analyze and optimize their campaigns, without having to take the additional steps of generating and downloading performance reports on a seperate page away from the ability to make edits to the campaigns.
Phase 1 Contribution: Performance and Wallet Cards
As a new member of the ad team, I took on the task of designing “at a glance” performance metric and wallet cards. The performance cards are meant to sum up the performance of all of a supplier’s campaigns within a certain time period, allowing the supplier a quick way to check the overall health of their campaigns. The wallet card, on the other hand, is meant to keep the supplier informed on the health of their advertising funds without having to navigate to a separate page.
Divergent Design
For the divergent thinking phase, I did an informal competitive analysis of other companies’ advertising hubs. I also conducted interviews with Wayfair supplier’s who also sell on platforms such as Amazon to understand what they liked about the analytics available on those sites. This allowed me to work with my PM to develop requirements on what data we should be surfacing in these cards. We decided upon the following:
-
RoAS (Return over Ad Spend)
-
Retail Revenue
-
Spend
-
Cost per Click
-
Impressions
For the wallet card, we decided that it should also be functional in warning the supplier of a low balance.
With my research and requirements in mind, I set about creating mulitple designs.
Stakeholder Review
While the performance cards were well received, there was much debate about the wallet card.
-
Would the placement of the wallet card next to the performance cards be confusing to the suppliers
-
Is there a need for the wallet card to be so prominent?
-
Is the wallet card needed at all when there is a wallet page?
Initially, I took this feedback into a new divergent design phase and created some other options for informing the user of their wallet status.
Ultimately, though, I pushed back in favor of keeping the wallet card. Having a space where the user can be informed of the health of their funds helps to minimize the stoppage of their ad campaigns. From a supplier standpoint, this would keep their campaigns bringing in value. From a Wayfair standpoint, it encourages the continuance of revenue flowing into Wayfair Ads.Thus serving both the suppliers' interest and the business need.
In addition to those thoughts, I also ran some unmoderated tests using UserTesting.com. These tests showed that our suppliers were able to identify the difference between the wallet card and the perfromance metric cards.
This rationale was enough to convince our stakeholders that their concerns were addressed, and I was able to move into the convergent design phase.
Completed Design in Context
As my first assignment with the Advertising team, this was not only a process of learning a new product space, but also a process of learning to work with a new group of cross-functional partners.
The importance of learning how to work with a new PM and lead Eng cannot be understated, as these are the people who will sharpen your skills with feedback, expertise outside of design, and support in making great experiences.
Phase 2 Contribution: Product Table
After having settled into my new role on the Advertising team, I took on a more substantial role in phase 2 of the UCM project.
Whereas Phase 1 was focused on creating a page where suppliers could check the performance of all of their campaigns, Phase 2 focused on the building of an experience where suppliers could look at the details of an individual campaign and make changes as they desire.
Goal
The product table, which was present in the legacy design of the campaign detail page, was seen as an opportunity to bring analytics on each product to a more visible and actionable space for the supplier. Therefore, my PM and I worked together conducting competitive analysis to determine which metrics would be most useful to include as a part of the updated table.
Dealing With Constraints
One major disagreement among the stakeholders was the default order of the performance metrics we were bringing to the table. In order to settle this, my L3 design partner and I set up supplier interviews to ask our suppliers directly for their preference. As the facilitator of these interviews, I asked the participants to drag columns containing performance metrics in the order of most important to least important in terms of helping them manage their campaigns. Armed with the learnings from that research, we were able to advocate for a specific default order.
Despite the interviews showing a clear preference for wholesale metrics over retail metrics, there was stakeholder pushback to making wholesale metrics visible by default. The concern was that a switch from retail metrcis to wholesale metrics would require a substantial amount of change management since retail revenue and roas are always higher than wholesale. Therfore, to a supplier, it may look as if their roas and revenue have suddenly taken significant drops.
Unwilling to go completely against the clear evidence we received in our interviews, I pushed for the inclusion of column customization as a compromise. That way, we could show retail figures by default and the suppliers would be given the power to change them to wholesale figures if they wished. With this compromise, the stakeholders aligned and further work was possible.
Table Actions
In addition to providing metrics that will help suppliers analyze their campaigns quicker than ever before, we looked to provide them with the ability to take action and optimize their campaign directly from the product grid. From our supplier interviews and surveys, we understood the process of optimization to be different for smaller suppliers vs larger, high earning suppliers.
For our smaller suppliers, going directly into each individual campaign and making changes was their modus operandi. For larger suppliers, managing a larger amount of products, bulk actions were crucial for optimizing campaigns on their scale.
With this in mind, I worked on the table actions and bulk actions in phase 2, including:
-
Pausing the advertisement of a product in a campaign
-
Removing a product from a campaign
-
Changing the bid of a product
-
All of the above, in a bulk flow
Nailing down the exact flows for the above actions required a number of stakeholder meetings to address shifting requirements, along with concerns brought about by various cross-functional team members. In the end, I was able to deliver a slate of design flows that achieved stakeholder approval and moved forward into being documented for engineering reference.
Final Design
