Answering your questions @Hourences:
You’re right about point 2.5 - I didn’t precisely convey what I meant (and what I was illustrating in the attached image). I’ve revised it. I draw attention to the lack of grouping for options that should naturally be grouped - like “My Library,” which refers to the user but sits on the opposite side of the screen from that user’s profile. It’s natural to look for such an option in the user’s dropdown menu, as many sites have trained us to do so. The same goes for sales-related options.
How would I approach clearer category hierarchies (left nav) in particular?
- I’d not show subcategories of 3D on the Fab.com entrance. Right now, for some reason, it’s maximized, hiding all other product categories.
- I’d allow users to select multiple categories and subcategories (that’s displayed with checkboxes in the image just above point 2.4 in my portfolio: Fab.com Buyer UX Analysis After the Unreal Marketplace Migration)
- I’d move as many filters out of the horizontal bar as possible (their inherent shortcomings can cause users managing product lists to struggle), since they’re unsuitable for more than 6–8 filter types.
- Possibly add a search box inside filter panels (the “Discover” element in my designs). Baymard.com research gives the following takeaways: “46% of test sites in our benchmark don’t let users reliably search within the filter types, resulting in needless friction,” and “Long lists of filter options that hinder users from easily locating desired filters can cause users to give up on filtering.”
- Always explain industry-specific filters (62% of sites use unclear labels, which users may skip when trying to filter for desired items). Some filters, such as “Style,” could be explained visually (e.g., a tooltip with an image representing the filter’s style).
[…]
Prioritization:
The first thing that comes to mind is a volume-of-feedback matrix, but it doesn’t really prioritize things that are already on the “to-do” canvas. This also includes how hard a task is to implement, as sometimes the design or a solution to a particular problem is simple when we think about it, but the tech behind it might be more complex than we imagine (e.g., a great search that works with misspelled product names). Unfortunately, I’m not competent enough to clearly answer which item will satisfy the most users and bring the most value to the company at the smallest cost. I can only guess in this case, which would be biased, for sure.
My (probably biased) view on that:
Looking again at my portfolio and for increased sales (especially during the upcoming discount period), the “Deal Hunter” notifications could be worth exploring. However, they’d be used only from time to time. Wishlist migration, on the other hand, could be a big win here and now, as people were complaining about losing their wishlists. Ultimately, I believe that anything search- and filtering-related would have a great outcome for every single Fab buyer (and seller, too).
Left nav/Filters:
As I wrote in the first part of this answer, I believe it still can be better. However, I can see that it has improved—kudos to your team for that!
For UE/Unity, I can see that there are filters for those in the left nav right now, which is great. For search, however, I’d never click the UE/Unity/UEFN buttons. But maybe people do use them; I don’t have access to the data.
For 2.3 and the Direct Matches, I’m pretty sure it’s a good thing, even if there are many, many results. If we consider a direct match - a search that fits 100% of the product title (including “dors system,” “doors system,” “advanced doors system,” “door system,” or even “doot system” [misspelling]) - I believe there should be no maximum for these (Direct Matches), as they seem to be exactly what the user is looking for.
Would a related result be harder to discover? A little bit (because of the white space and them being pushed down). The ultimate goal of search should be to display what the user is looking for in the Direct Matches, but ultimately, you would display all the results you display right now; the difference is that they would be categorized into two sections.
If any of these ideas resonate, I’d love to discuss them further or explore how we might collaborate. Please feel free to reach out to me directly.
