When Help Isn’t Where Users Expect It: E

When Help Isn’t Where Users Expect It: Ensuring Users Receive Guidance During Specific Workflows

This case study has been approved for external sharing. Certain details have been omitted or generalized to protect proprietary processes, confidential client data, and sensitive business information.

Overview

This research project explored whether users are receiving the guidance they need during specific workflows within an internal platform. The project originated when the development team added a support resource link directly into individual workflow steps without UX oversight. The addition was driven by support tickets indicating that users wanted relevant resources available directly within the workflow.

The change raised important questions about how users currently access guidance, whether existing guidance options were discoverable, and whether the interface was clearly communicating the functions already available to users.

I joined the project after the UX team identified the need for research. I contributed to the survey design and independently identified an additional interface inconsistency that expanded the research opportunity. I then analyzed the survey findings and prepared recommendations to present to the product team.

How It Started

User Requests Surfaced a Need

Support tickets indicated that users wanted relevant resources to be available directly within individual workflow steps rather than requiring them to navigate elsewhere for help.

Development Responded

To address this need, the development team added hyperlink resource buttons directly into individual workflow steps without UX oversight. While the new buttons provided direct access to resources, their introduction raised important UX questions around visibility, consistency, page real estate, and whether an existing interface pattern could better address the underlying need.

The UX Team Identified an Opportunity

Before I joined the project, the UX team had already identified the new resource buttons as an area worth investigating. The team paused development and initiated research to better understand how users currently access guidance and what they actually need during workflows. I joined at this stage to contribute to the research effort.

My Contributions

Research

Collaborated with the UX team on research direction and survey design.
Co-wrote and reviewed survey questions to ensure neutral language and avoid leading questions.
Ensured the duplicate icon issue was captured as a distinct research question.

Analysis & Recommendations

Independently identified a UI inconsistency during platform observation that expanded the scope of the project.
Conducted the full survey analysis after data collection.
Synthesized findings and developed design recommendations.
Prepared my analysis and recommendations to present to the product team.

What I Identified

When I joined the project, I observed two distinct UX issues within the interface.

There were two places where users could access support resources: through the page header and directly within individual workflow steps.

Development had added the in-workflow support resource button in response to support tickets requesting easier access to relevant resources. However, the same support resource was already available through the page header. (See photos A and B)

This raised an important question: Do users know this menu option exists in the header?

If users were already able to access the relevant support resources through the header, understanding their awareness and behavior was important to determining whether an additional support resource link within every workflow step was necessary. At the same time, the additional link introduced a visibility concern. Adding another persistent element within each workflow step increased the amount of information competing for users’ attention and occupied valuable page real estate.

Separately, I identified a consistency issue within the interface.

There were two places where the same ? icon was used, but the icons served completely different functions. In the page header, the ? icon opened a Help popout containing support resources. Within individual workflows, the same ? icon represented Suggested Steps. (See photo C) Using the same icon for two different functions is a gross violation of consistency. Although the icons looked identical, users were given no indication that they would behave differently depending on where they appeared.

This raised a separate question: Do users understand and engage with Suggested Steps?

Together, these observations identified two separate areas to investigate:

01 — Discoverability of existing support resources
Were users aware of the support resources already available through the page header, and was the additional in-workflow button actually necessary?

02 — Consistency and clarity of Suggested Steps
Did users understand what the ? icon represented within workflows, and did they recognize and engage with Suggested Steps?

A. Support Buttons recently added by developers

in each workflow

B. Existing top navigation icon for support menu

C. Current Suggested Steps Pop out

Methodology

Survey

The UX team and I designed and distributed a survey to end users to understand awareness, behavior, and preferences related to guidance during workflows.

I contributed to survey development by drafting and reviewing questions to ensure neutral language and avoid leading questions. I also identified the duplicate ? icon as a distinct research question so we could understand whether users recognized and engaged with the existing functionality. The survey included a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended questions.

Data Sources

Survey responses from 38 panel members
Header option usage data to understand how many users are interacting with certain features, and of those users, how many are repeat users versus one-off engagement
Open-ended responses about how users prefer to receive guidance

Survey Findings

✅ A large majority of participants turn to support resources and supervisors/team leads when they need help during a workflow (participants could select multiple options, so there may be overlap

✅ Of those who utilize support links, 75% are locating them from saved favorites, while 40% use the link next to the workflow, and 35% search manually

✅ When asked where they'd prefer to receive guidance, nearly every response pointed to the platform directly, some specifically at the specific workflow

✅ Participants expressed a clear preference for guidance linked directly to the workflow, rather than navigating to a separate menu or resource

🤔 Suggested Steps usage was almost a 50/50 split, with 50% utilizing this feature and 47% do not. Of that 47%, participants shared they don’t use it due to experience, need, or unawareness of this feature

✅ Just over half of the participants had explored the Help tab in the pop-up menu

🎉 A majority of participants indicated they would be likely to use workflow-specific guidance if it were surfaced directly within the pop-up menu

What the Findings Indicated

The findings confirmed that users have a real need for guidance while completing workflows, but the existing experience was not necessarily making that guidance as clear or accessible as it could be.

Panel members expressed a strong preference for accessing guidance directly within the platform and, in many cases, directly within the workflow.

At the same time, only about half of panel members reported using Suggested Steps, while just over half had explored the Help tab within the header popout menu.

This suggested an opportunity to provide workflow-specific guidance while also addressing the inconsistency between the two uses of the ? icon.

The research also provided an opportunity to reconsider the newly added support resource button. Rather than adding another element to the interface, the existing guidance functionality could potentially be reorganized to provide the same access while creating a more consistent experience.

Proposed Solution

Repurpose the Existing Suggested Steps Button for Support Resources

Research showed that associates wanted direct access to the relevant support resource within each workflow. Rather than adding another button to the interface, I proposed repurposing the existing Suggested Steps ? icon to provide this functionality. The support resource already exists within the page header, so this approach brings that existing functionality directly into the workflow without introducing another interface element.

01 — Repurpose the Existing ? Icon

The existing ? icon currently opens Suggested Steps within each workflow step. I proposed repurposing this button to provide direct access to the relevant Support Resource instead. This addresses the original associate request while also aligning the in-workflow experience with the Support Resource already available through the page header.

02 — Introduce a New Icon for Suggested Steps

Because Suggested Steps still provides value for a portion of users, I proposed introducing a new i icon to preserve access to the feature.

This separates the two functions visually and gives each icon a clear, distinct purpose: ? for Support Resources and i for Suggested Steps.

03 — Remove the Added Support Resource Buttons

Repurposing the existing Suggested Steps button eliminates the need for the additional Support Resource buttons that had been added to individual workflow steps by developers. This allows the requested functionality to be incorporated without adding more interface elements or taking up additional page real estate.

04 — Establish Clearer, More Consistent Interactions

The final approach gives each function its own clear interaction while reusing existing interface space:

? → Support Resources
i → Suggested Steps

Supporting Evidence

The recommendation was grounded in the survey findings and my observation of the interface.

Users wanted guidance within their workflow.

The majority of panel members seeking support preferred accessing resources directly within the platform, and nearly every open-ended response expressed a preference for guidance linked directly to the relevant workflow.

Suggested Steps served a real need for some users.

Approximately half of panel members reported using Suggested Steps. The proposed i icon preserves this functionality rather than removing it.

The existing help experience was not universally discoverable.

Just over half of panel members had explored the support resource button in the header popout menu, reinforcing the need to consider how guidance is surfaced and communicated.

The existing iconography created a consistency issue.

The same ? icon was being used for two different functions. Separating Suggested Steps under a new icon allows each interaction to communicate its purpose more clearly.

The additional support resource button was not the only way to provide contextual guidance.

Repurposing the existing in-workflow ? icon provides direct access to the relevant support resource without introducing another persistent interface element into every workflow.

Revised matching UI elements for support menu

Revised icon for Suggested Steps

My Contribution & Handoff

During my time on the project, I:

Identified the UI consistency issue through independent platform observation.
Collaborated with the UX team on survey design.
Reviewed questions to ensure neutral, non-leading language.
Ensured the duplicate icon issue was represented as a distinct research question.
Analyzed survey responses from 38 panel members.
Synthesized findings around guidance awareness, behavior, and preferences.
Developed a proposed solution addressing both identified UX problems.
Prepared my analysis and recommendations for presentation to the product team.

The remaining work will be carried forward by the team, including evaluating and scoping implementation of the proposed interaction changes and conducting broader research to measure the impact of the updated guidance experience.