Switch & Save was designed to encourage customers to purchase lower-cost alternative electronic components. The proposition made commercial sense, but there was limited evidence that saving money was a priority for the customers it targeted.

​

Before investing further in the feature, we needed to understand whether it addressed a genuine customer need.

Rather than starting with improvements to the existing interface, I wanted to understand the decisions customers made when selecting components.

​

Would they switch to an alternative to save money? What would make them confident that another component was suitable? And what impact might a substitution have on their wider development process?

​

These questions became the starting point for the research.

We conducted unmoderated research with 42 participants, followed by moderated sessions with five participants.

​

The research explored how customers selected components, their attitudes towards alternatives and the factors that influenced purchasing decisions.

​

It also helped us understand the context in which customers were working particularly when sourcing parts for prototypes.

The research challenged the original Switch & Save proposition.

​

For customers developing prototypes, changing a component could mean additional checks, redesign work or delays. Even when a cheaper alternative was available, the potential saving often didn't justify the time and effort involved in evaluating it.

​

Customers weren't simply looking for the lowest price. They needed suitable components that would allow them to keep their projects moving.

The findings gave the team evidence to question the assumptions behind Switch & Save and reconsider where further development should focus.

​

I presented the research to stakeholders, helping shift the discussion away from simply optimising the existing feature and towards understanding the problems customers actually needed solving.

​

The research informed the team's next stage of ideation rather than validating the original cost-saving proposition.

This project reinforced the importance of validating a problem before committing to a solution.

​

Switch & Save was based on a reasonable commercial assumption, but research revealed a different customer priority. By questioning the proposition early, we could redirect the conversation towards customer needs rather than investing further in an idea that didn't fully reflect their working practices.