Crowdbotics stands out as a unique organization because it operates as both a platform and a service. Unlike many competitors that rely on a traditional agency model, Crowdbotics democratizes the web and app development process, making it more accessible and scalable. This hybrid approach allows clients to benefit from a streamlined development experience while maintaining flexibility in execution. However, this positioning also presents challenges.
While the Crowdbotics service simplifies the development process, this ease of use can sometimes lead to misconceptions about the underlying power of the platform. Some members of the target audience mistakenly perceive it as “too simple”.
Crowdbotics does compete with cheaper, less robust low-end solutions. But it also targets some of the same enterprises as higher-end agencies providing fully customized development services. Navigating this competitive landscape requires clear differentiation and a concise value proposition.
Crowdbotics sells itself as an ideal balance of cost-efficiency, speed, and power. Part of the new messaging included the development of a more mature brand identity and the launch of a new website. To accomplish this incrementally, efforts were prioritized based on business impact—starting with a short-term triage of the most critical issues such as data collection and user flow. Longer-term goals included a full website redesign aimed at improving conversion and positioning. The objective was to deliver a more robust, flexible web ecosystem—one that not only showcases the platform’s capabilities but also serves as a strategic launchpad for gathering insights and enabling smarter sales and marketing actions.
Personas: The client had personas they’d relied on in the past. Using them seemed to make sense, based on the research and surveys. There are numerous personas, but five of them represent the majority of users today. Naysayer: Naysayers investigate CB because they want to take another path to finding an alternative. Their visit represents an opportunity to win them over, but the risk is that they Naysayer will find reinforcement for their convictions. Naysayers are typically middle- and lower-tier IT executives or developers who are looking to advance a different solution. Average visit duration: 00:00:48 Most visited page: platform (parent) Biggest pain points: internal dissent, need for evidence First Timer: First Timers have no vested interest in CB, but instead visit the site out of curiosity and paid search. They often visit again, once they’ve had a chance to look at other answers to their need(s). First Timers are often ambivalent about the technology selection process, but are looking for technologies that make their work life better and/or easier. Average visit duration: 00:00:39 Most visited page: use cases (parent) Biggest pain points: uncertainty, need for insight Guru: These individuals know a lot about code and wielding its power as a business asset. Interested in documentation, reading posts from the archive, and modular code from the marketplace. Different from advance team members in that they are already customers. Average visit duration: 00:05:07 Most visited page: post archive (parent) Biggest pain points: performance, pricing, and prestige Advance Team: Visits the site to obtain leverage in the vendor/partner selection process. Various levels of expertise and specialization, with a shared interest in validating CB selection for their team. Interested in comparisons with CB, app/website project workflow, industry-specific benefits and use cases. Average visit duration: 00:02:46 Most visited page: industry solutions (parent) Biggest pain points: capabilities, convenience, cost Gatekeeper: Holds some or all of the keys to the proverbial kingdom. Typically a higher-ranking IT, Legal, or Compliance team member whose approval in considered critical before adoption of any new solution can be seriously discussed. Often follows the Advance Team Average visit duration: 00:02:51 Most visited page: industry solutions (parent) Biggest pain points: capabilities, convenience, cost
0.6% Form conversion rate
Homepage bounce rate was 71%—higher than any other entry point
Homepage template lacked flexibility for modern use cases
Navigation caused confusion due to repetitive language and unclear hierarchy
Crosslinking was weak: only 5.3% of clicks occurred on-page; blog-to-blog traffic was minimal
Blog post search and sort were underutilized (only 9.6% of users engaged with it)
User Surveys (16 total)
Participants: 7 prospects, 7 current customers, 2 tech leaders
General dissatisfaction with branding and design
Navigation lacked clarity; labels were redundant and uninformative
Forms were long, cluttered, and mobile-unfriendly
Strong interest in industry-specific content, but low engagement on those pages
Over half (51%) were still unclear what Crowdbotics actually offered after visiting the site
Sample Questions:
“What would make you click on a related AI article?”
“How can navigation clarify page content?”
“What’s missing from this form to make you respond?”
Personas (Top 5)
Naysayer
Skeptical internal challenger.
Avg. visit: 00:48
Top page: Platform overview
Pain points: Credibility, internal resistance
First Timer
New visitor from search. Curious, uncommitted.
Avg. visit: 00:39
Top page: Use cases
Pain points: Uncertainty, relevance
Guru
Experienced developer, already a customer.
Avg. visit: 05:07
Top page: Blog archive
Pain points: Speed, documentation, value
Advance Team
Evaluators assessing platform fit for their team.
Avg. visit: 02:46
Top page: Industry solutions
Pain points: Comparison, cost, fit
Gatekeeper
Exec or compliance officer. Critical for approval.
Avg. visit: 02:51
Top page: Industry solutions
Pain points: Security, scalability, clarity
Usability Testing
Participants: 9 individuals
Approach:
Automated and moderated tests using wireframes and low-fidelity prototypes
Tasks mapped to real user journeys across taxonomy levels
Findings:
Most users failed to complete key flows
Long scrolling and unclear forms led to drop-offs
Navigation still didn’t support core journeys
Design Hypothesis
The existing site met the bare minimum, but just barely. Users had low expectations due to weak industry standards—but this was an opportunity. By improving clarity, decision support, and personalization, we could elevate both the user experience and conversion rates.
Concept & IA
Wireframes:
Focused on physician and facility search (top user priority).
Information Architecture:
Unified structure across public and gated content
Simplified nav using journey-specific tags
Progressive forms with milestone feedback
Navigation:
Reorganized to surface key pathways early and support intent-driven journeys.
Mid-Fidelity Design & Testing
Created a componentized wireframe kit for client use
Prototypes tested for engagement, completion, and clarity
Mobile vs. desktop split showed decision-makers skewed desktop
Final Design
Focused on parent-level pages with zone mapping for deeper pages
Optimized for desktop resolutions, especially for high-value personas
Visual design light-touch to support modular rollout and content strategy
Design Impact
Performance Metrics (12 months):
🚀 23% increase in site traffic
⏱️ +29s average time per page
🔁 40% growth in repeat visits
📅 9.3M appointments
📈 15% increase in online bookings
📝 +21% form conversions with progressive layout
Successes
Boosted traffic, engagement, and form completion
Clearer paths for core personas
Stronger performance from assessment-driven flows
Helped the agency secure extended content and strategy work
Areas for Improvement
Lack of cohesive content strategy limited conversion potential
Navigation exposed deeper IA issues (e.g., codeshare and marketplace sections)
Crosslinking and contextual CTA placement still needed refinement
Optimization Opportunities
Focused content creation at the top of the funnel
Persona-specific form variants to speed up intake
Clearer taxonomy and better internal search
Continued use of AI-assisted copy/image generation, QC’d for brand fit
Let me know if you’d like this version:
Pasted into your WordPress
formatDesigned as a clean one-pager or case study PDF
Condensed for Behance, LinkedIn, or pitch deck versions
Happy to polish it even further based on tone (more formal? more punchy?) or visual hierarchy.
Desired Opportunities:
Prioritize improvements based on importance to the business to eventually deliver a completely new website ecosystem. Short term triage of the most critical issues. Longer-term redesign of the site to strategically improve conversion. Deliver a more capable, flexible launchpad to gain and action intelligence for sales and marketing initiatives.
Research
Market research had been conducted by a VC sponsor on several occasions during the business windup. This included competitive research, and the blog categories themselves.
Quantitative Data:
Hotjar heatmaps
Google analytics for existing experience
CRM data from conversion points
Customer/prospect form submissions
Resource downloads
The client wanted to implement the new design approach based on the current content, while still maintaining the admins’ ability to build unique instances to meet future needs.
1. 0.6% form conversion rate was notably low
2. It was rare for users to drill more than a page deep; the bounce rate for visitors to the homepage (71%) was actually higher than scenarios when a user entered the site from any other parent page (58%)
3. The homepage had some content management issues; the template wasn’t flexible enough to handle many newer use cases
4. Heat maps seemed to indicate a problem with the main navigation; possibly a combination of confusing, repetitive language; blind page links; and counterintuitive control behaviors
5. Crosslinking was a major issue; on page clicks represented only a tiny fraction of overall clicks (5.3%). Likewise, there was a lack of traffic between blog posts. Users were not getting the context they were looking for to drive action from related posts while on a page – and within a category. Post search/sort was similarly underutilized by visitors (9.6%)
6. Likewise, there was a lack of traffic between blog posts. Users were not getting the context they were looking for to drive action from related posts while on a page – and within a category. Post search/sort was similarly underutilized by visitors (9.6%)
– Surveys:
16 users were surveyed remotely. These incorporated 7 prospects, 7 current customers, and 2 technology managers from other parts of the tech industry
1. On the whole, most customers and prospects either felt ambivalent about; or disliked; the existing branding and site design. A small group (6.4%) thought it was at least acceptable
2. The majority of users said they felt there was no clear indication of what the items in the navigation represented – repetition of page title terminology in parent and child pages failed to motivate users
3. Forms overall were considered far too long and complicated, the amount of scrolling on mobile in particular was considered “sloppy” and “mind-numbing”
4. Users were generally interested in industry-specific content, but appeared to spend very little time on the Industries parent page
5. There was a general (51%) confusion about what Crowdbotics actually did even after visiting the existing site
6. Questions asked included; “How could CB page content about platform AI get you to click on a CB article about AI?”, and “How can a website’s main navigation help clarify what a page is actually about?”, “What do you think about this form after reading it?”, “Are there any changes we can make to the form to increase the likelihood you’d respond?”
(+show pull quote)
(+show stat spotlight)
– Qualitative Data:
Survey questions included; “How could page content about platform AI get you to click on an article about AI?”; “Name two ways the items in a website’s main navigation might offer clues to the meaning of the pages.”; “What do you think about the information collected in this form after reading it?”, “Are there any changes we can make to the form to increase the likelihood you’d respond?”
– Journey Map:
Based on previous research, we know that there are several different types of CB user. Each one has a different set of motivations, and arrives at the site in a different way, but they share some fundamental pain points
(+show simple journey map)
– Personas:
The client had personas they’d relied on in the past. Using them seemed to make sense, based on the research and surveys. There are numerous personas, but five of them represent the majority of users today.
Naysayer:
Naysayers investigate CB because they want to take another path to finding an alternative. Their visit represents an opportunity to win them over, but the risk is that they Naysayer will find reinforcement for their convictions. Naysayers are typically middle- and lower-tier IT executives or developers who are looking to advance a different solution.
Average visit duration: 00:00:48
Most visited page: platform (parent)
Biggest pain points: internal dissent, need for evidence
First Timer:
First Timers have no vested interest in CB, but instead visit the site out of curiosity and paid search. They often visit again, once they’ve had a chance to look at other answers to their need(s). First Timers are often ambivalent about the technology selection process, but are looking for technologies that make their work life better and/or easier.
Average visit duration: 00:00:39
Most visited page: use cases (parent)
Biggest pain points: uncertainty, need for insight
Guru:
These individuals know a lot about code and wielding its power as a business asset. Interested in documentation, reading posts from the archive, and modular code from the marketplace. Different from advance team members in that they are already customers.
Average visit duration: 00:05:07
Most visited page: post archive (parent)
Biggest pain points: performance, pricing, and prestige
Advance Team:
Visits the site to obtain leverage in the vendor/partner selection process. Various levels of expertise and specialization, with a shared interest in validating CB selection for their team. Interested in comparisons with CB, app/website project workflow, industry-specific benefits and use cases.
Average visit duration: 00:02:46
Most visited page: industry solutions (parent)
Biggest pain points: capabilities, convenience, cost
Gatekeeper:
Holds some or all of the keys to the proverbial kingdom. Typically a higher-ranking IT, Legal, or Compliance team member whose approval in considered critical before adoption of any new solution can be seriously discussed. Often follows the Advance Team
Average visit duration: 00:02:51
Most visited page: industry solutions (parent)
Biggest pain points: capabilities, convenience, cost
– Usability
– An initial audit of the website, blog, and marketplace was combined with analytics data – then workshopped with both the audience and the client – to offer plausible usability touchstones and help judiciously prioritize the work
(+show usability deck)
– Number of Users:
9 individuals were asked to participate in the initial round of usability testing; testing was automated and conducted using a third-party service.
– Methods:
One round of blind testing was conducted, based on a series of wireframes representing each level of the taxonomy. Final testing used functional interactive prototypes
(+show low-fidelity wireframes)
– Actions:
Develop and refine experience design solutions based on the available research and input received during testing, beginning early with detailed data collection, and integrating this into the design work on an ongoing basis
Quotes
“[I] spent 5 minutes on that website, and I still didn’t understand what the company did, or what they were selling.” (+show pull quote)
Hypothesis
There is a “bare minimum” expectation users have from this kind of search, and the existing CHS site still met them, but just barely. Because the research showed some degree of equivalency between the ability to complete a search with appointment-setting and overall member retention, generic errors and weak points in the flow had to be addressed. Affirmations and negations needed to be context-specific and include adequate fallbacks.
While it is true that there is a low bar for expectations from an onsite healthcare search, research indicated that this was due to the lack of detailed information available. This represented an opportunity to add value by providing a more complete resource with more angles to view the subject matter from.
(+show alignment documentation)
(+show issues from existing search)
Concept
– Wireframes:
The majority of user interactions were related to locating a physician or a facility, with physician searches, with the majority of them starting with the caregiver. This is where we started our ideation process, as this would ultimately be a part of most other search operations
(+show raw wireframes)
(+show medium-fidelity wireframes)
– Information Architecture:
The IA developed was all-inclusive and addressed both the public-facing site and gated areas where customers and registered users were able to exchange and sell various CB plugins. Overall taxonomy remained rather deep, but the initial start pages and their appearance in the navigation was marked simplified using a series of more easily digested journey-specific tags and blades, in conjunction with stepped forms that broke the long series of fields into an incremental experience with rewards and payoffs as the user completed each step.
(+show taxonomy)
(+show initial IA)
(+show navigation)
Test Mid-Fidelity Designs
– Usability Testing:
Mid-fidelity designs provided the best opportunity for testing early and often. A wireframe kit was developed for the client to serve as a stop gap between the initial design efforts and the eventual implementation of the final design system.
(+show prototype)
(+show rough wireframes)
(+show forms system wireframes)
Final Design
– Final Designs:
Final design was limited to parent pages, with much of the site being created as low-fidelity wireframes to map zones. The overall effect was to enable the journey for the disparate user personas without spending too much time on visual design.
The amount of mobile and desktop traffic had proven to be almost exactly the same. However, we were able to determine that the key positive decision-making personas; Gurus, Gatekeepers, and Advance Team; all tended to have more desktop than mobile usage, with a notable cluster in laptop resolutions. Pages were designed with this in mind, especially to minimize the impact of scrolling on the design.
(+show page designs)
(+show components)
(+show style sheets)
Design Impact
– Performance Data:
Most of the numbers improved overall, but the changes made didn’t seem to make a significant difference to the Naysayers. It is likely that these individuals were going to make the decision they did all along, and were just visiting the site so nothing was missed prior to making a recommendation. Using search terms targeted at each persona type allowed us to better track their end-to-end progress through the funnel.
After 12 months
23% increase in traffic
00:29 increase in average time spent per page
40% increase in repeat visitorship
9.3M appointments
15% increase in website appointments
(+show results graphic)
– Successes:
The interim enhancements made to the site improved both traffic and conversion rates substantially. The longer-term universal enhancements made were less successful, as the client had some difficulty implementing an effective content strategy. The agency has stepped in to assist the client with marquee content development. The new progressive form fared better, with a 21% increase in conversions.
– Areas for Improvement:
The lack of a cohesive content strategy hurt the rollout of the new site. One way this manifested itself was in the lack of conversion blades woven into related subject matter. The presentation and organization of the navigation was successful enough that the client began to notice other taxonomic and UX-related issues with the domain. Two in particular were the codeshare and online marketplace. These are sources of supplemental revenue, but are not as active as they potentially could be. One cause is the lack of content. The crosslinks to these areas on the site are not presented in a context-based or consistent manner. The related content blades and CTA lures in particular require attention.
– Opportunities for Optimization:
The greatest current need is the creation of fresh, topical copy and visuals at the start of the funnel. The agency has been helping by providing AI-generated images from sophisticated prompts, along with AI copy content which is then QC’ed and reworked for final delivery. One problem common to both the codeshare and the marketplace was the lack of a clear taxonomic structure to organize and prioritize informatiifion. Improvements should make the source materials easier to find. In addition, the client is now looking to shorten the intake form and create specc versions based on the user’s journey and specific needs. This customization and acceleration of the process should further improve the analytics.
© 2023 Jon Gifford