02Discovery

Listening before designing.

Five research methods, layered — behaviour, frustration, and unmet need from multiple angles before opening Figma.

Research approach

Not one method.
A full picture.

1Week 1

UX Audit of the existing app

Systematically catalogued every heuristic violation, hierarchy failure, and friction point on the live home screen — before talking to a single user.

2Week 1–2

User Interviews + Structured Interview Guide

Designed a structured guide covering User Behaviour, User Needs, and To Be Observed tasks. Ran sessions with users directly on the live app.

3Week 2

Journey Mapping — 3 Personas

Mapped journeys for Durgesh (daily commuter), Krutik (occasional rider), and Aarshad (rare user) — exposing exactly where frustration peaked and bookings broke down.

4Week 2–3

Affinity Mapping + Synthesis

All findings were clustered into four recurring themes — each became a non-negotiable design constraint for the redesign.

5Week 3

Usability Testing on the live app

Ran moderated sessions observing where participants hesitated, tapped the wrong element, or abandoned the booking flow entirely.

01 · UX Audit

What ten years of decisions actually look like.

UX issues annotated on the live home screen
UX issues annotated on the live home screen — severity-rated across information hierarchy, visual clutter, and interaction friction.

Recommendations

Issues, mapped to structural fixes.

Audit recommendations
Recommendations from the audit — each prioritised by severity and mapped to a concrete structural fix.

02 · Interviews

The questions that surfaced the truth.

Structured interview guide
Structured guide — User Behaviour (grey), User Needs (blue), and To Be Observed tasks (pink).
Common pain points
4 recurring pain points — discoverability, clutter, navigation under pressure, guidance for rare users.

03 · Journey Maps

Three personas. Three different stories.

Rather than a single generic user, we mapped three real usage patterns — each revealing different friction triggers and unmet needs from the same interface.

Durgesh — Daily Commuter
Durgesh — Daily Commuter. Neutral through most of the journey until accidentally tapping a promo drops him sharply to deeply unhappy at the final booking step.

04 · Synthesis

Four themes that shaped everything.

Affinity map
Affinity map — Visual Clutter · Booking Focus · Shortcut Usage · Time Pressure.
01🧠

Visual Clutter

Map, banners, and service grid competed equally — "noisy" with no clear hierarchy.

02🎯

Booking First

The primary task was buried. One dominant, unmissable entry point needed on open.

03

Shortcuts Matter

"I type the same place every day." Intelligent pre-fill and quick-book shortcuts demanded.

04⏱️

Time Pressure

"When I'm in a hurry I switch to Uber." Speed under pressure was OLA's critical gap.

In their own words

What users actually said.

Uber's quick ride categories and sleek UI save me time during late train trips. OLA feels noisy — when I'm in a hurry, I want less distraction.
Daily commuter · Bangalore
I prefer Uber because I know where to tap and get guided steps. OLA's screen is overwhelming, and I'm not patient enough to figure it out every time.
Occasional user · Mumbai
Giant 'Where to?' bar at the top, nothing else until after booking. When I'm in a hurry, I want less distraction and less friction.
Rare user · Delhi
I sometimes switch to Uber or Rapido when OLA prices surge. It's faster to grab another option than wait around.
Power user · Pune