The Cadence: Biweekly Usability Testing

Every. Two. Weeks.

We ran usability studies at Meijer headquarters in Grand Rapids, Michigan with 5-7 participants per session, 45 minutes each. We recruited real Meijer shoppers through the customer team—people who actually used the app (or tried to).

The Process:

• Week 1: Design iterations based on previous insights

• Week 2: Test with users, take notes, observe struggles

• Week 3: Synthesize findings, report insights within 2 days

• Week 4: Inform the next sprint, repeat

This wasn't "validate our assumptions" research. This was "we have no idea if this works, let's find out" research. And it was glorious.

The technical reality check:

Challenge 1: Carousel functionality
Marketing wanted carousels. Users... tolerated them? We wrestled with:

• Auto-rotation (yes or no? how fast?)

• Touch gestures (swipe left/right? what about accessibility?)

• Indicator visibility (dots? thumbnails? how many items before it's overwhelming?)

Solution: We built multiple prototypes, tested them, and landed on a hybrid approach that balanced business needs with usability. Auto-rotation only on the hero banner, manual swipe everywhere else, clear indicators, and keyboard-navigable for accessibility.

Challenge 2: Truncation rules (or: How to avoid accidentally displaying curse words)

Product names in retail are wild. Long, inconsistent, sometimes profane when truncated.

Real example (paraphrased to keep this professional): A cleaning product with an unfortunate truncation that... yeah, we couldn't ship that.

Solution: Dynamic truncation rules based on character count and whole-word breaks. QA testing with real product database. Fallbacks for edge cases. And a lot of laughter during review sessions.

Challenge 3: Inconsistent product images

Some products had beautiful high-res images. Some had grainy stock photos. Some had nothing.

Solution: Designed for the worst-case scenario (no image) and made it look intentional. Placeholder states with brand colors and iconography. Lazy loading for performance. And a lot of advocating to the product team to prioritize image quality.

Challenge 4: mPerks needed engagement

The loyalty program was powerful but underutilized. Users didn't clip coupons. They forgot their barcode. They didn't realize they were missing savings.

Solution:

• Moved mPerks ID barcode to the homepage (one tap away, always)

• Surfaced relevant coupons in context (browsing cereal? here's a cereal coupon)

• Added notifications for expiring rewards

• Designed a playful "You saved $X this trip!" celebration moment

The personalization problem:

Users were skeptical. "Why is it recommending this?" "Is it just trying to upsell me?" "I don't trust this."

We needed to make recommendations feel helpful, not creepy. Transparent, not algorithmic. Playful, not pushy.

Our approach:

1. Contextual suggestions based on shopping list
"Inspired by your list" showed items that complemented what they were already buying. Making tacos? Here's salsa, cheese, and tortillas. Not interested? Scroll past. No judgment.

2. Easy dismissal and learning
Every recommendation had a small "x" or "not interested" option. And we learned from it. Dismissed seafood three times? We stopped suggesting it.

3. Playful copy and visuals
Instead of "Recommended for you" (boring, corporate), we tested phrases like:

• "You might also need..." (helpful)

• "Inspired by your list" (contextual)

• "Customers also bought..." (social proof)

• "On sale this week" (value-driven)

Users responded best to contextual and value-driven language. Noted.

4. Celebrating moments
When users clipped a coupon, we added a subtle animation and confirmation. When they completed their shopping list, we celebrated it. Small moments of delight go a long way.

How we built trust with stakeholders:

1. Showed our work early and often
We didn't wait for polished designs. We shared sketches, wireframes, messy prototypes. We invited feedback before we were attached to solutions.

2. Brought stakeholders to usability testing
Product managers, engineers, business stakeholders—we invited them to watch users struggle (and succeed). Seeing real people use (or fail to use) their ideas was more convincing than any deck.

3. Reported insights fast
Within two days of testing, we delivered a concise report:

• What we tested

• What we learned

• What we recommend changing

• What's working (celebrate wins!)

Speed mattered. Insights informed the next sprint.

4. Spoke in outcomes, not features
Instead of "we need a bigger button," we said "users with mobility challenges can't tap this—let's fix it so everyone can use it."

Instead of "carousels are bad UX," we said "users are scrolling past the carousel—let's test a static layout and measure engagement."

The result?
Design was invited to roadmap planning. We shaped ideas early. We influenced prioritization. We became partners, not order-takers.