This brief is fictional. The business, people and numbers are invented for practice. Do your own research with real people where the brief asks for it, and never present invented findings as real in your portfolio.
The brief
Fictional client: Brightside Plumbing and Heating is a family business with six engineers serving one city. Most customers find them through local search and neighbour recommendations. Their website was built eight years ago. It has a long home page with the company history, a services page listing 30 services in one paragraph, a gallery, and a contact form that asks for twelve pieces of information.
The owner, Maya, says: "People phone us to ask things that are on the website. We lose emergency jobs to competitors because we don't answer the phone fast enough at night. I'd like more bookings through the website."
The problem to solve
Customers cannot quickly tell whether Brightside handles their problem, how soon they can come, roughly what it will cost, or how to book without phoning. Your job is to find out which of these matters most to real customers and redesign the website so that it answers those questions and makes requesting a job easy on a phone.
You may choose a real local service business instead (with the owner's permission) and use this brief as a structure.
Target users and assumptions
Users
- Homeowners with an urgent problem (a leak, no heating) who are stressed and on a phone.
- Homeowners planning work (a new boiler, a bathroom) who compare several companies over days.
- Landlords and letting agents who book repeat work for several properties.
Assumptions to test
- Urgent customers care most about how fast someone can come.
- Planned-work customers want price guidance before they contact anyone.
- Reviews and accreditations strongly influence trust.
- Most visitors use phones.
- The twelve-field form is a major reason people phone instead.
Business goals and user needs
Business goals
- Increase booking requests through the website.
- Reduce routine phone calls about prices, areas covered and opening hours.
- Capture emergency jobs outside office hours.
- Present the business as trustworthy and professional.
User needs
- Know quickly whether this company can fix my problem and covers my area.
- Understand how soon someone can come and roughly what it costs.
- Trust that the engineers are qualified and fair.
- Request help in a minute or two, on a phone, without creating an account.
Scope and constraints
In scope
- Home page, services overview, one service detail page (choose emergency repairs or boiler installation), about and trust content, booking request flow, confirmation.
- Mobile-first design with a desktop adaptation.
- Copy for all designed screens.
Constraints
- The business cannot promise exact prices online; it can give typical price ranges.
- Online payment is out of scope.
- The site will be built on a common website builder, so avoid custom interactions that need complex code.
- Emergency availability changes daily; the owner can update one short status message.
Research plan
- Review the current site (or a real local equivalent) and note every question it leaves unanswered.
- Analyse three to five competitor websites with the competitor matrix.
- Interview five people who have hired a tradesperson in the last year, using the interview guide template.
- If possible, speak to the business owner or front-desk staff about the most common phone questions.
- Run a quick five-second test on the current home page with three people: what do they remember?
Competitor analysis worksheet
Copy this grid into a spreadsheet or your design file. Fill one row per competitor you choose.
| Competitor | Services clear? | Area covered shown? | Price guidance | Availability or response time | Trust signals | Booking steps | Mobile quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Competitor A | |||||||
| Competitor B | |||||||
| Competitor C | |||||||
| National booking platform |
Interview questions
- Tell me about the last time you needed a plumber, electrician or similar. What happened?
- How did you find and choose who to contact?
- What did you need to know before you got in touch?
- What made you trust, or distrust, a company?
- How did you contact them, and why that way?
- What, if anything, went wrong or was frustrating?
- If it was urgent, what was going through your mind?
Synthesis
- Write each observation on its own note, tagged with the participant number.
- Group notes by similarity into themes on an affinity map.
- For each theme write an insight: what it means for the design and why.
- Rank insights by how often they appeared and how much they affect booking.
- Separate urgent and planned-work findings if they differ.
Problem statement and success metrics
Homeowners with an urgent problem struggle to request help from Brightside on their phones because the website does not show whether the company covers their area, how soon an engineer can come, or a quick way to book, so they phone competitors who answer first.
A starting draft. Rewrite it from your own research.
Success metrics
- Booking requests submitted through the website per week (compare before and after launch).
- Task success in usability testing: request an emergency visit without help.
- Time to find the area covered and typical response time.
- Number of routine phone questions about price and area (ask the business to tally for two weeks).
Information architecture and user flow
- Do a content inventory of the current site and mark each item keep, rewrite, merge or remove.
- Group services into a small number of customer-facing categories (for example Emergency repairs, Heating and boilers, Bathrooms, Landlord services).
- Draw a sitemap with no more than six primary pages.
- Draw the booking request flow from home page to confirmation, including "area not covered" and "outside office hours" paths.
Sketching and wireframing
- Sketch three different home page concepts in 15 minutes each: one led by emergency help, one by service categories, one by trust and reviews.
- Pick one with reasons, and wireframe it on mobile at low fidelity.
- Wireframe the service detail page and the booking request form (no more than five required fields).
- Design empty, error and confirmation states for the form.
- Review with the wireframe checklist template and get feedback from one person.
UI, components and prototype
UI and component requirements
- A small visual system: type scale, colour palette with semantic colours, spacing scale.
- Components: header with phone call button, service card, review snippet, availability banner, form fields, primary and secondary buttons, footer.
- All interactive states for buttons and fields.
- Real copy, including price ranges and a clear note that prices are estimates.
- Responsive desktop version of the home page and booking form.
Prototype requirements
- A clickable mobile prototype covering: home, a service page, the booking form, an error, and the confirmation.
- Realistic content in every screen.
- A tappable phone number link that is clearly labelled.
Usability testing and iteration
Testing plan
- Write three tasks: request an emergency visit tonight; find the typical cost of a boiler service; check whether your area is covered.
- Recruit five people who own or rent a home.
- Run moderated sessions of about 20 minutes using the usability test plan template.
- Record task success, hesitation points and quotes.
- Summarise in the findings report template.
Iteration
- Fix every critical and serious issue and document what you changed.
- Retest the changed screens with at least two new people.
- Show before and after for at least two changes in your case study.
Accessibility checklist
7 items
Final deliverables
8 items
Portfolio case study outline
- Summary: the business, the problem, your role, the outcome you can honestly claim.
- What customers needed: two or three research insights with evidence.
- Before: the main issues on the original site.
- Structure: sitemap and booking flow decisions.
- Exploration: the three home page concepts and why you chose one.
- Design: annotated mobile screens.
- Testing: tasks, results, changes made.
- Reflection: what you would do next, for example measuring booking requests after launch.
Assessment rubric
Score yourself honestly, then ask a peer or mentor to score you. Aim for Competent on every row before calling the project finished.
| Criterion | Not yet | Developing | Competent | Excellent |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Problem framing | Problem restates the brief or jumps to a solution. | Problem is stated but not supported by research. | Clear problem statement supported by your own evidence. | Sharp, evidence-based problem with explicit scope and trade-offs. |
| Research and synthesis | No real participants or sources. | Some research, but findings are listed rather than synthesised. | Real participants, themes and insights that clearly shape decisions. | Well-chosen methods, honest limitations, insights that changed the direction. |
| Structure and flow | Only isolated screens. | Flow covers the happy path only. | Complete flow including key errors and empty states. | Flow is simplified with evidence and covers edge cases thoroughly. |
| Visual and UI quality | Inconsistent type, spacing and colour. | Mostly consistent with some rough areas. | Consistent visual system, clear hierarchy, all states designed. | Polished system with reusable components and thoughtful detail. |
| Accessibility | Not considered. | Contrast checked only. | Contrast, focus, labels, target sizes and colour independence addressed. | Checked with keyboard and screen reader; issues found and fixed. |
| Testing and iteration | No testing. | Testing done but no changes made. | At least five sessions with clear findings and documented changes. | Multiple rounds, prioritised findings and a measurable improvement. |
| Case study communication | Gallery of screens without explanation. | Process described but long or unfocused. | Concise, skimmable story with annotated decisions. | Compelling and honest story a reviewer can understand in five minutes. |
Milestones
Tick tasks as you finish them. Progress is saved in this browser.
Progress is saved in this browser.
-
Milestone 1Research
4 items
-
Milestone 2Define
3 items
-
Milestone 3Structure
2 items
-
Milestone 4Wireframes
3 items
-
Milestone 5UI and prototype
4 items
-
Milestone 6Test and iterate
3 items
-
Milestone 7Case study
3 items
Optional extension challenges
- Design a simple availability status the owner can update from a phone in under a minute.
- Design a review request email sent after a job.
- Write the content for three service pages using plain language guidelines.
- Plan how you would measure the impact for the first two months after launch.
Hints and worked example
Try the project yourself first. The worked example shows one way through, with illustrative content that is not real research.
Show hints and the worked example
Illustrative only. These are not real research findings.
Example insight: In this imagined study, four of five participants with an urgent problem said they called the first company that "looked like it could come today". The insight: availability is the deciding factor for urgent jobs, ahead of price.
Example design response: The home page header shows a short availability banner ("Emergency engineers available tonight until 22:00") updated by the owner, next to a "Request urgent help" button and a "Call now" link. The booking form asks only for postcode, problem type (chosen from five options), a short description, name and phone number. A postcode check runs first, so out-of-area customers are told immediately and are not asked for anything else.
Hint: if your research shows planned-work customers behave differently, consider two clear entry points on the home page instead of one form for everyone.