Fatura Simples
Discovery with in-depth qualitative researchContext
Fatura Simples was a SaaS financial automation platform for companies that work with monthly fees, subscriptions and recurring payments. It brought invoicing and collection together in one place, with bank slips (boletos), card payments, invoice issuing, subscription management and tracking of outstanding payments.
The challenge
Issuing invoices, tracking payments, managing late payments and serving customers are ongoing tasks for any business that lives on recurring revenue. With active clients using the platform every day, the challenge was to understand the real user experience: where the product helped their routine, where it created friction and what kept operations from running simply inside it.
Discovery goal
Assess the user experience with six active clients, looking at the main features (contracts, sales, plans, billing, dashboard and services) to understand which flows caused the most difficulty, how people found and interpreted information and which opportunities would make financial management simpler, more integrated and more efficient.
Discovery
I ran the Discovery on my own, end to end. It consisted of in-depth qualitative interviews, about 45 minutes long, with six active client companies: four health plan companies, one automotive service company and one funeral plan company, two operating nationwide and four regionally (São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Pernambuco and the Northeast). I organized the findings into an affinity map (facts, patterns, behaviors and insights), created empathy maps and user journeys, consolidated the results by area and took the opportunities into a RICE prioritization with the team. The whole process is documented in the Miro board alongside.
Research Results
Quantitative: every interviewee liked the home dashboard, but 66.7% were confused by how its information was laid out. 66.7% had problems with onboarding, the contracts screen and the sales screen, 66.7% turned to WhatsApp for support and 66.7% pointed to usability and information architecture issues. 83.3% used another system alongside it to run the business. Plans (50%), bank slip issuing (33.3%) and adding services (33.3%) also caused friction. The most valued features included client records, bank slip issuing, the dashboard, reports, the virtual card and the checkout link. Qualitative: the affinity map recorded slow and partial migration during onboarding, near abandonment of the process, insecurity when generating bank slips, lack of familiarity with systems and the habit of turning to WhatsApp for support.
Improvement Opportunities
Each problem found became a recommendation for the product, prioritized with RICE (reach, impact, confidence and effort): merge sales and contracts into a single source, bring forecast and actual metrics to the dashboard, alert on unpaid fees, restructure notifications, make plan creation more flexible, tell sale types apart and make WhatsApp support explicit. In RICE, the score is Reach (clients impacted) × Impact (0.25 to 3) × Confidence (0 to 100%) ÷ Effort (1 to 10). Each team member scored the criteria and the final value of each one went into the formula. Example: merging sales and contracts scored 100 × 3 × 85 ÷ 1 = 25,500, the highest score. These are recommendations proposed in the Discovery, not implemented features.
Deliverables
A findings report, updated personas, an opportunity map and a backlog prioritized with RICE. Together, these deliverables were the foundation for building the product roadmap. On the board, the roadmap is a proposal, organized from Q2 to Q4 (April to December), with the first items in Q2. Its implementation is not documented in this case.
Services
- Product Discovery
- UX Research
- In-depth interviews
- Empathy maps
- User journeys
- Personas
- Opportunity mapping
Full Discovery on Miro: click the image to explore the board
How I ran the Discovery
- 6 interviews
- Affinity map
- Results
- RICE scoring
- Roadmap
Research Results
6 active clients- Health plans 66.7%
- Automotive services 16.7%
- Funeral plans 16.7%
Area of operationNationwide 33.3% · São Paulo 16.7% · Rio de Janeiro 16.7% · Pernambuco 16.7% · Northeast 16.7%
Reason for choosing the productFeatures · Value for money · Service · Support · Virtual card · Trust
- 100%
- suggested improvements to the system
- 83.3%
- used another system alongside it
- 83.3%
- wanted to see open sales and installments
- 66.7%
- had problems during onboarding
Key insights
- Onboarding shaped trust in the product
Quantitative66.7% had problems during onboarding
QualitativeDelays, partial migration and near abandonment of the process
- Contracts, sales and plans overlapped
Quantitative66.7% had problems with contracts and sales; 50% with plans
QualitativeDuplicate sales and little flexibility on payment dates
- The product was not the only management tool
Quantitative83.3% used another system alongside it
QualitativeClients who kept using another system
- Support happened outside the product
Quantitative66.7% turned to WhatsApp
QualitativeInsecurity generating bank slips and lack of familiarity with systems
Pain points by area
- Contracts66.7%
Long, confusing creation flow, with duplicate sales
- Sales66.7%
Hard to understand, no sorting or upcoming due dates
- Dashboard66.7%
Confusing layout for revenue and forecast income
- Usability66.7%
Heuristic and information architecture issues
- Support66.7%
Turned to WhatsApp as a support channel
- Plans50%
Confusing and complex screen, though usable
- Billing33.3%
Confusing bank slip issuing, no due date alerts
Improvement Opportunities
Recommendations proposed in the Discovery and prioritized with RICE. They are not implemented features.
Reach×Impact×Confidence÷Effort=RICE
- Reach
- clients impacted
- Impact
- 0.25 (minimal) to 3 (massive)
- Confidence
- 0 to 100%
- Effort
- 1 (very low) to 10 (very high)
Each team member scored the criteria; the final value of each one went into the formula.
- Problem foundA long, confusing contract flow that created duplicate sales
- Evidence66.7% (4 of 6) had problems with the contracts screen; "duplicate sales" in the affinity map
- Proposed recommendationMerge sales and contracts into a single source and deactivate a contract in 1 click
- RICE score100 × 3 × 85 ÷ 1 = 25,500
- Contracts 66.7%
Problem found: Long creation flow, duplicate sales and no due date choice
Proposed recommendation: Merge sales and contracts into a single source and deactivate a contract in 1 clickRICE 25,500 - Dashboard 66.7%
Problem found: Confusing information; 83.3% wanted to see open sales and installments
Proposed recommendation: Forecast and actual metrics: new sales, receipts and open invoicesRICE 17,000 - Billing 33.3%
Problem found: Confusing bank slip issuing, no due date alerts
Proposed recommendation: Show an unpaid fee alert on the virtual cardRICE 15,000 - Usability 66.7%
Problem found: Heuristic and information architecture issues
Proposed recommendation: Error, success, renewal, booklet and duplicate record notificationsRICE 12,000 - Plans 50%
Problem found: Confusing, complex screen; 33.3% relied on support for the plan grid
Proposed recommendation: Flexible plans, with automatic pricing by number of dependentsRICE 7,650 - Sales 66.7%
Problem found: No sorting or control of upcoming due dates
Proposed recommendation: Tell registered, installment and recurring sales apartRICE 7,000 - Support 66.7%
Problem found: Turned to WhatsApp as a support channel
Proposed recommendation: Make WhatsApp support explicitRICE 6,000
From deliverables to roadmap
- Findings report
- Personas
- Opportunity map
- Prioritized backlog
- Q2Apr-Jun
- Q3Jul-Sep
- Q4Oct-Dec
Roadmap proposed on the board, from April to December. Its implementation is not documented in this case.