Glints Job Search

How might we create a better job search experience to drive users to sign up?

My Role
  • Designed mid-fi to hi-fi mockups
    Usability Testing
    Built and maintained Glints design system
Team
  • Hazel Teng (Product Manager)
  • Farah Poernama (User Researcher)
  • Ritika Motwani (Software Engineer)
  • Ross Lo (Software Engineer)
Results
  • Reduced time spent from search to job application
    Applications increased up to 5% in first month of release

The Challenge

Glints’ mission is to help people reach the career of their dreams. To improve this, we needed to improve our job search component to make it more functional and user-friendly for users to easily find the job they want.

I was tasked to redesign our Job search component to help increase our number of sign-ups and job applications.

How our old search component looked before our redesign

Discovery and Research

To start the redesign, we first looked for gaps in our existing search components. We gathered feedback from our Customer Satisfaction Surveys and also and analyzed the data on the search and filters that we tracked on Amplitude.

Issues We Focused On FOR THE MVP
Not all filters are seen on mobile, therefore some are left unused

At the outset, the search component offered multiple built-in filters that users could choose from. However, we observed that only a few of these were actually being used because they were not visible to the users.

Search suggestions appear slow and are not intuitive to user’s needs

We discovered that when a user types a keyword, the suggestions were rather slow in appearing. This is because we show suggestions under a job title, company and location. We also saw that the list of suggestions that appear are unrelated to the keyword that the user typed. For example if the user types "J”, other words without the letter ‘J’ also appear in the suggestion list.

Search suggestions appear slow and are not intuitive to user’s needs

We discovered that when a user types a keyword, the suggestions were rather slow in appearing. This is because we show suggestions under a job title, company, and location. We also saw that the list of suggestions that appear are unrelated to the keyword that the user typed. For example, if the user types "J”, other words without the letter ‘J’ also appear in the suggestion list.

On mobile and desktop screens, the search component was too large and the filters were overwhelming to the user.

Also, the search component occupied too much of the opening fold and left no more room for other relevant job cards.

Based on our insights, we decided that the search field and the filters, both equally important, needed to be ideated separately to speed up the needed reconstruction of the component.

We also studied 4 competitor websites (LinkedIn, Glassdoor, Angelist, JobStreet) and here are our key takeaways:

Ideation

  1. The websites provided users with 2 search boxes on load, Job Title and Location. These are also the most frequently used filters in our search component.
  2. They ranked the filters according to relevancy to the user and organized them accordingly.
  3. The filters' values changed depending on the keywords of the users.
  4. The users could immediately see the entire list of filters.
Creating the Search Component
Research Strategy

Qualitative, moderated remote usability testing

Participants

6 active Glints users, 5 new Glints users
To identify if the new functionality is easy to use and more improved than the current functionality

Proposed Solutions

We decide on testing two search boxes (instead of just one) and separating the sort function and the filters. Our goal was to determine which users reached the job details faster and which functionality was more comprehensible to the users.

Top User Insights
  1. 4 out of 5 users mentioned that the additional location search bar made their search easier
  2. All users thought that the 2 search bars are mandatory - thinking they have to fill both search bars in order to get results
  3. Users who have used both mobile and desktop mentioned that they want all filters to be seen in one view, eliminating the need to scoll back and forth.
Filter Component
Research Strategy

Qualitative, moderated remote usability testing

Research Strategy
  • 3 users with a serious intent to search for a new job logged in and tried to apply for 2 to 3 more jobs
  • 3 users with no intent to apply for a job also logged in the past month
Proposed Solutions

We were able to come up with two design options to test for the Filters:

Prototype A
We wanted to try to keep the filters on top and check if users understood the function of collapsing and expanding filters. Our assumption is that we can keep the filters on top but we would need to reduce the number of options they see at the onset to make it less overwhelming.

Prototype B
We noticed that in e-commerce websites the filters were placed on the sidebar, and when users searched for items the filters also changed depending on the keyword. We tested this pattern to see if our users understood this functionality.

Top User Insights
  1. For Prototype A, one user was frustrated that she could not find the filters and had to be directed to their location. Also, the reset button was not visible.
  2. Four out of five users preferred Prototype B because they could see all of the options and were able to navigate the components easily. One user also suggested that their previous searches  be visible through a search component dropdown.

What We Shipped

Based on all the research and insights, we were able to come up with a search component that allowed the user to prioritize searching for their main keywords: job title and location. This helped users focus on most relevant keywords. We also added search suggestions that would appear instantaneously each time a user types a letter.

We also updated the filter functionality so the user only sees what need based on the availability of date.
This helped to refine the search.

On mobile, our new design shows more details on the job cards and the filters are more accessible to the users.
There is a fixed search bar that can be clicked for quick browsing.

Results

Our goal was to reduce the time spent by users searching jobs and applying. We were able to achieve this by making the auto-search results more intuitive, removing dummy data from our database and prioritizing job title field and location field. Our SUS score did not score lower than 68 and we were able to increase applications by 5% after the first month.