Improving the content creation experience
Overview
Creating content and capturing information is one of Bloomfire’s core components as a knowledge management platform. The content editor has long been neglected, mostly because of continued support for the IE11 browser. Due to the ending of support for IE11 and an influx of numerous customer complaints, Bloomfire has decided to improve the experience of the content creation process.
Role
I was the lead designer for this project, working alongside the Director of Product, another designer, and 2 developers.
Research
I went through 80+ requests tickets gathered in Pendo from customers regarding the content editor. I also worked with the customer success team to gather more feedback and worked with the product team to prioritize problems and solve them.
I also conducted usability tests on one of the most cited concerns (scheduling) to identify existing pain points and validate design solutions (see details of the tests later in the case study).
Goals
User: Have a better experience when creating and classifying content
Product: Increase engagement and encourage users to create more content natively
Business: Improve the product’s perceived value and stickiness
Settings Panel
Problem
The post settings panel is often overlooked by users, with only 38% of them actually opening and viewing it, according to data from Pendo. This can be attributed to 2 main factors:
The panel is hidden, making it easy for users to miss.
The panel contains an overwhelming number of items, which can discourage and confuse users.
Filling in the post settings is crucial in organizing posts and enabling users to find relevant results through search, a core functionality of Bloomfire.
Solution
In the redesign, I made several improvements to the settings panel to streamline the process and make it more user-friendly:
I reduced the number of items in the panel by relocating them to more intuitive placements on the page. This helps users navigate and understand the settings better.
To provide clear guidance, I added indicators for collapsed sections, allowing users to easily track and identify the settings they have already filled.
The settings panel is now open by default and remains open while editing, encouraging completion.
Publish Options
Similar actions were grouped together in the new editor to help users easily find relevant actions and allow for a more intuitive experience. With the introduction of a split button component, publish-related actions were taken out of the settings panel and placed in the publish button’s submenu.
Customizable Layout
Problem
Users reported dissatisfaction with the limited layout options, as only one fixed width was available for all text and media. However, the current width is often too narrow, making it difficult to view certain media without expanding or downloading them.
Solution
To solve this problem, we introduced new layout options. The dynamic view now allows media to occupy 1600px in width, while keeping the text at 800px width in posts. This improves media viewing while ensuring text readability.
Authors can set the default layout view for their posts, choosing how they want them to be displayed. Additionally, viewers have the flexibility to change the layout view according to their preferences.
Scheduling Flow
To provide a more intuitive workflow, I relocated the scheduling action from the settings panels and integrated it with the other publishing options.
The previous design caused many issues for users due to unclear indications. One problem was that it was not clear when a post was scheduled, resulting in accidental publishing instead of scheduling. To prevent this issue, scheduling now serves as the final action, transitioning users from edit to view mode.
User Testing
To address user complaints about scheduling and minimize confusion for those accustomed to the current flow, I tested new scheduling designs, also considering the edge case of allowing users to schedule and send posts for moderation simultaneously.
The Director of Product pushed for a 2-step scheduling flow, but I advocated for a 1-step flow. I conducted an A/B test to gather data supporting my idea. It would also align better with technical constraints as it requires less development time.
The 1-step scheduling flow outperformed the 2-step flow, receiving 100% (5/5) of the participants' votes. Notable observations included:
When editing a previously scheduled post, users should be warned that it will remove the schedule.
Incorporating a consistent double-button design would offer a more intuitive experience. This resolved the awkwardness of integrating the moderation process within the scheduling flow.
Responsiveness
To accommodate users creating in viewports of various widths on multiple devices, I designed responsive toolbar layouts that prioritize the most used actions, while reorganizing others in logical submenus.
Results
The feedback regarding the new editor was overwhelmingly positive, as users shared that it is “visually stunning” and is “much smoother to use”. Beyond the positive feedback, we also noted the following:
I also learned not to be afraid to challenge ideas, but to do so respectfully and constructively backed by evidence. After all, everyone is working together as a team with the shared goal of providing the best experience for our users.