Improving marketing performance
of the company by creating
a multibrand competitor website following UX design approach

The project was done for Fintegra Consulting Group Oy.
Fintegra provides consultancy services to support immigration process for highly skilled specialists
and foreign entrepreneurs interested in doing business
in Finland.
In 2018, Fintegra redesigned their website to make it more visually appealing and improve our SEO ranking. After some time it was noticed that the most company's customers reached the website through organic search whereas other digital marketing channels, such as Google and Facebook produced dismal results at great expense. Main issue was that the website was based on blue-sky concepts without any usability testing and user research. At first, the team wanted to make another redesign but it could potentially harm the SEO. For this reason, I started to look for alternatives.
Background story
My role
I was the sole UX designer on the team alongside 1 designer and 5 company managers. I built the website by going through users research, analysing data, designing low fidelity and high fidelity prototypes and conducting usability testing sessions.
Design process
In-depth interviews
Usability testing
Affinity diagram
Website navigation
Lo fi sketches
Hi fi prototype
Launching MVP
No-code platform
A/B testing
Interviews & Usability testing
In total there were 3 methods of gathering insights that included in-depth interviews, usability testing sessions and analysis of competitors companies.
Interviews were mainly conducted with Fintegra’s managers and customers who received Finnish residence permits on various bases.

In total there were 8 conducted interviews, each interview took about 45 minutes on average, in total 7 questions were asked.

The main goal of interviews was to get interviewees' opinions on difficulties they confront using old website, their needs, and motivations towards Finland as an immigration destination.
Usability testing & interviews
Competitor analysis
I conduct research on similar immigration companies to achieve the best possible interaction experience and collect the best practices. I highlighted advantages and disadvantages for each website.
Affinity diagram
Affinity diagram was used to synthesise all collected insights from transcribed interviews, usability tests and competitors' research. Furthermore, these insights were sorted and grouped under common topics representing website navigation, content, visual design references, user interactions and layout structures.
In usability surveys, users commonly criticise Fintegra's difficult website navigation. It was necessary to utilise information that is useful from customers' point of view.
Website navigation
Design process started with wireframing. First low-fidelity prototype was developed in procreate application then hi-fidelity prototype was made in Figma.
It was decided that all website pages should have a similar design layout, with certain variations based on the content.

Each website landing page adheres to a similar structure that contains header, hero block, few content blocks, contact form and footer so that users could easily find information recognising common patterns on the website.
Low fidelity prototype
UI kit
Personally, I can't call it a design system. However, there is already a well-documented library of parts with an atomic structure and naming conventions. We believe that any product team may benefit from sharing similar language around visual assets.
High fidelity prototype
I proceed to high fidelity prototype once low fidelity prototypes were validated with users.

Below you can see high fidelity prototype of the main website page that was made in Figma.
I launched website MVP using no-code platform Tilda Publishing. Tilda allowed me to swiftly implement adaptive design to make it accessible on all screens with different resolutions starting from phones and ultra wide monitors.

I relied on no-code approach because it allowed me to test my hypotheses on how improved UX design can improve marketing performance of the company.
Life version
I utilised both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. Quantitative research part included A/B testing whereas qualitative research part includes interviews that are based on open-ended
and behaviour-based questions with company's customers.
The goal of user testing and followup interviews was to test the efficiency of the site's paths from information search & to test the effectiveness of CTAs in guiding the user's decision making.
User testing
A/B testing
A/B testing was conducted by promoting two variants of website pages on Facebook with similar content to determine which page has the greatest marketing metrics.

I took 3 pages from the website Finconsult and contrasted them with pages on the website Fintegra by promoting them using same creatives on Facebook and Instagram. Below you can see these variants and ad creatives that I created for split test on Facebook.
Variant A
Variant B
Finconsult page "Business immigration in Finland".
Fintegra page "Business Immigration to Finland".
Variant A
Variant B
Finconsult page "Immigration to Finland".
Fintegra page "Immigration to Finland".
Variant A
Variant B
Finconsult main page.
Fintegra main page.
Based on research the creation of two competing websites allowed not only to improve the effectiveness of marketing performance of the company, but also to improve many of the financial indicators of the company, since the company began to receive more customers.
One-on-one interviews results
According to the interviews it was found that the age has a significant impact on website preferences. Users who were older gave their preference to Fintegra website whereas younger users preferred Finconsult website.

There were also other unexpected insights from the interviews. User 2 and User 6 mentioned that they had previously contacted Fintegra but decided not proceed as customers with the company's services. After some time same users contacted through Finconsult website. They did not notice that the website is owned by the same company. After some time, these users realised that Finconcult and Fintegra are essentially the same company. Nevertheless, they continued to collaborate with the company despite unfavourable experience.
A/B testing results
Results of 3 different A/B testing campaigns on Facebook showed that Finconsult website is the winner. In the first campaign Fincosnult website has 45,71% more leads than Fintegra website. In the second campaign Fincosnult website has 20,29% more leads than Fintegra website. In the third campaign Fincosnult website has 72,97% more leads than Fintegra website.