Client project - Milkywire

Scope and background

Milkywire helps organisations raise money to support various situations related with humanity, the planet and animals. My task was to research if a new campaign with the collaboration between Milkywire and Green game jam was using the right content in order to result in engagement and donations.

Team

Myself, with support from the UX designer at Milkywire

My role

Qualitative reasearcher

Process

  • 5 interviews with a card sorting element

  • Analyse data and findings

  • Present findings for the Milkywire team

  • Present suggestions based on findings

Participants

  • 5 persons

  • 28-35 years old

  • Gaming experience: zero - full time gamer

  • Donation experience: zero - monthly engagement

How did I start?

Together with Milkywire I decided the focus observation points for the interviews:

  • What is the first impression of the campaign?

  • What information is relevant and not?

  • What parts of the campaign are more important, why and ranked in what order?

  • What part of the campaign evokes more feelings of engagement?

  • How is the transparency of the campaign perceived?

  • How is the trustworthiness perceived?

  • Any other thoughts of the participants

Some of the findings

  • 3 out of 5: Felt over all confusion as a first impression

  • 3 out of 5: Felt confusion about the green game jam + milkywire collaboration

  • 3 out of 5: Would need to look up more information in order to donate

  • 4 out of 5: Think the campaign doesn’t explain how the money will actually help

“Scattered information, so many things mentioned, what is the focus?”

“Words like impactful, what is impactful according to the organisation?”

“The little text by the donation button is the most clear”

  • 100% of the participants: Perceived the clarity of what the donations will support low

  • 100% of the participants: Had their emotions most evoked, and were called to action by the information about the environment and mascot animal

“And how much is 1h in the context, what gets done in 1h?”

“What does 80000 hours of fieldwork do?”

“Images with animals evokes an urge to help”

Thoughts from gamers:

“We are triggered by fast dopamine kicks, information needs to be short and straight forward, especially during the period we are gaming.

Conclusion

The clarity of the campaign was low and created confusion in the participants. It was clear that participants didn’t read everything with patience, and therefore missed a lot of information that could have given answers to some of the confusions. I believe the following recommendations would improve the engagement and clarity:

Recommendations

  • More specific what the donations will do (narrow it down, it’s better to show that you’re doing one thing good).

  • How will you help - give concrete actions and outcomes (not overly detailed, just clarity).

  • Powerful, short and simple information about the collaboration between the organisations and what they do and stand for.

  • Make some information optional but easily accessible - should be fast and easy to go through the main purpose of the campaign.

  • As a second step in this research I would do a quantitative research to prove my findings. If the campaign was launched already I would use google analytics or similar to prove my findings.

Learnings

Interviewing together with card-sorting was a good method to both understand user motivations, goals and expectations as well as observing their reasoning in relation to behavior. I found it very insightful, and also fun.

To fully complete the task I would have wanted to analyse the actual interaction with the campaign, with a digital usability and user test. As well as analyzing a heat map and klicks, to back up and prove the findings of my interviews.

Presenting my findings was fun and satisfying as they matched with my own assumptions.

Previous
Previous

Swedish furniture company

Next
Next

Passion project - Thrill Silver