The Resulting Matchup

Having completed both Value Map and Customer Profile, we now put them together to see how they matchup or “Fit”. Products achieve “Fit” by addressing important jobs, alleviating pains and creating gains that customers care about. First let us examine the

“Fit” for Momoshop and our Customer Profile for Websites.

Figure 4.13.1 – Value Customer Fit (Momoshop)

In terms of “Jobs”, Momoshop allows a user to achieve all of their goals except comparing. Being able to cater to the various tasks the user would like to undertake while using the site means it will be more likely able to retain customers. Also as

understood from our interviewees, comparisons can still be carried out with external methods such as opening multiple browser windows or tabs to view and compare items.

Thus making it something users can choose to overlook while using the website.

As for “Gains”, they haven’t created any obvious way to assure consumers regarding quality but the brand has definitely won some consumer trust such that it feels that it doesn’t need quality assurance features within the website. Other important expectations such as payment security, finding items quickly and easily, as well as recommendations were all covered with the features that Momoshop had built into the website. They also managed to provide simpler ways to navigate between categories and viewing detailed product information through the use of clever UI design. The selection of payment method, keying in payment information and delivery details are also all designed to fit in one single page making the checkout process faster. They also provide customer service and rewards that users think are nice-to-haves. The only other areas where they have failed to provide are the simple registration of account and easy comparison of items. The registration process is still a hassle and while you can login using third party accounts, the initial setup is still required.

For “Pains”, the website has managed to avoid the pain of an overcrowded landing page, choosing to focus design attention on creating a clear layout with specific promotional and categorical areas. Some of the other “Pain Relievers” that Momoshop has built into the site have actually becomes a basic requirement for consumers, so much so that they don’t realize that the search bar, well-categorized products and easy navigation are actually alleviating the pain of rummaging through the site to get something they are looking for. By allowing users to save their personal data, they removed the need to retype with each purchase. On the flip side, even though they have

filters and sorting options to allow users to fine-tune their search, the way search results are displayed remains something that can be improved. Alas the lack of comparison features again is something that means they fail to alleviate some of user’s pains.

To summarize, Momoshop has managed to address all of the important “Jobs” and satisfies most of the “Gains” that consumers expect. They have some shortcomings in alleviating the “Pains” but they do not hinder the user experience too much for consumers. Thus we could say that Momoshop has achieved a rather good “Fit”.

Now we move on to examine the “Fit” for Carousell and our Customer Profile for apps.

Figure 4.13.2 – Value Customer Fit (Carousell)

Similarly for “Jobs”, Carousell only fails to deliver in the aspect of comparing. The difference here is that consumers are not able to easily conquer this shortcoming on the mobile device, they can’t jump between browser windows or tabs, making it a more glaring issue than when compared to the website experience.

For “Gains”, Carousell’s marketplace design means users make their own transfer of payment and there is no issue with payment security within the app, also being able to see ratings, and directly seek clarifications with the chat feature means consumers are more assured about the quality of the product and the party they are dealing with. Their sorting and filters provide users a smooth fast experience trying to narrow down their search for something. They also provide recommendations of items or collections that may be of interest to users. Carousell has also made the purchasing a simple and fast process with their One-click buy. The sorting of categories have also managed to somewhat fulfill user expectations for navigation within the app. Registration is quick, and customer service is easily available. Thus the only missing expectations are comparison of items and rewards for shopping.

For “Pains”, the app utilizes a single page scrolling design thus eliminating the pain of clicking through pages; however, we feel this only alleviates the pain of using the mobile app slightly. Yes users do can scroll through a single page to browse items easily but it still does not negate the fact that a user can only see 4-6 items at once. Thus it still fails to address consumer’s largest pain point. Couple that with the previously mentioned lack of comparison features and immediately we have the first few pain points unsolved.

The app does however do a good job in the search functionality, the easy navigation thanks to its User Interface and categorization, as well as how it displays information about products. Lastly, due to it being a marketplace Carousell also fails to offer third-party payment options or delivery, as those are self-negotiated between buyer and seller.

To summarize, Carousell has managed to address all of the important “Jobs” but where websites have saving grace thanks to users finding their own solution to comparing, mobile apps are unable to provide that. The overall experience for Carousell has managed to cover most of the expectations of consumers, and even include additional features that users were not even considering. However the biggest “Mis-Fit” comes in the “Pains” section where the limitations of the mobile app are not carefully addressed.

We could say that Carousell has managed to craft a smooth and user-friendly shopping app experience but lacks the right ingredients to make it a more valuable platform than retail websites. This could be the reason why Taiwanese consumers who place a large emphasis on comparisons have yet to abandon website shopping for mobile apps.