Case studies

Higher Education

Strategy & Product
Architecture

Product Strategy Priority Guides Journey Mapping Usability Testing

Challenge

A higher education institution needed to redefine its digital priorities before investing in a redesign. The question was not aesthetic: it was understanding who the priority users were, how they made decisions, and where the real friction points were blocking applications.

My goal was to transform that uncertainty into an actionable product structure.

Grid of 7 personas: Ana Silva (18, Lisbon), John Florence (22, USA), João Costa (19, Lisbon), Cristina Gonçalves (24, Coimbra), Carla Pires (26, São Paulo), Carlos Oliveira (36, Porto) and João Fernandes (42, Lisbon) — user segmentation by profile and goal
User segmentation — 7 personas based on real behavioural patterns

My Role

  • User and stakeholder interviews
  • Proto-personas and behaviour-based personas
  • Journey mapping by user type across the acquisition funnel
  • Priority guides and content structure definition
  • Block wireframes and information hierarchy
  • KPI definition and strategic roadmap
Detailed persona: John Florence, 22, United States — goals (find an English-language management course, choose an internationally recognised university), needs (legal support, cultural integration, financial aid), behaviours and frustrations (difficulty finding clear information, fear of visa refusal)
Reference persona — international candidate, with documented goals, needs and frustrations

Discovery &
Research

The biggest risk was not in the visual interface, but in the lack of clarity during the comparison and application phases, which led to drop-off before the final decision. This finding redirected the investment: instead of starting with visuals, we started with structure and content priority.

Seven personas built from behavioural patterns, covering domestic and international candidates at different stages of the decision journey. Journey maps for each user type revealed the exact moments of friction and drop-off across the acquisition funnel.

Product priority guides: content priority and reading order by screen type, anchored to friction points identified in research
Priority guides — content priority and reading order per template, anchored in research friction points

Design Decisions

I translated insights into priority guides: a definition, per screen type, of what content appears, in what priority and reading order. The bridge between research and design.

Each priority decision addressed a friction point identified in the journey, with hierarchy designed for linear reading and assistive technologies from the very first decision.

From priority guides, I defined the structure in block wireframes: composition, hierarchy and content grouping for each template. Focus on information architecture and semantic order, not visual finish. The final visual execution was developed in collaboration with the design team, built on this structure.

Block wireframes defining composition, hierarchy and content grouping per template, with semantic reading order
Block wireframes — composition and information hierarchy per template
Journey map for persona John Florence — Potential International Undergraduate Student: user steps from initial research to comparing options, with columns for actions, goals and experience, emotions and thoughts, frustrations and touchpoints
Journey map — John Florence, international candidate, from first contact to decision

Outcome & Impact

  • Clear segmentation of priority users
  • Prioritised journeys across the acquisition funnel
  • Priority guides and content structure per template
  • Block wireframes with defined hierarchy and semantic order
  • Decision framework and metrics baseline for post-implementation evaluation
  • These artefacts defined feature priorities and the roadmap before any interface decision or development investment

Mini-case

Usability Testing
in a Real Context: Health

Context

A private hospital's mobile application with critical onboarding and registration flows.

In-person usability test in a real context: user interacting with the mobile app on smartphone, with quote from Inês Pereira — 'I would like to have more feedback on the processes so I don't feel lost'
In-person test session — direct observation of real behaviour. "I would like to have more feedback on the processes so I don't feel lost" — Inês Pereira
Task 2 results dashboard — Book an Appointment: 82% success rate, 14% with help, 4% did not complete; 45% with difficulties on specialities, 72% on calendar, 68% on health insurance, 100% with difficulties on fields and buttons; average time 4 minutes 10 seconds
Quantitative results — Task 2, Book an Appointment

What I did

  • In-person usability tests
  • Real mobile context
  • Direct observation of errors, hesitations and abandonment

Main problems

  1. Missing feedback at critical moments

  2. Loss of orientation during flows

  3. High error risk during validation steps

Results

Critical task (booking an appointment) identified with an 82% success rate before redesign. Key issues documented with direct evidence to prioritise fixes.