Intent based onboarding
Constant Contact Mobile
My role
Product Design
User Experience
Interaction
My team
Glenn Brannely
Gyorgy Grell
Jake Levy
Ben Sweet
Linda Borghesani
Tools
Figma
Notion
Jira
Confluence
Description
An onboarding experience that identifies real user goals from the very beginning, and aims to help people get value faster.
Context
Most onboarding flows try to funnel everyone through the same generic path. But at Constant Contact, we knew our users come in with very different goals, some want to grow a list, some want to send a newsletter, and some just want to try things out.
We were tasked with rethinking onboarding from the ground up - starting with desktop - with a goal of meeting users where they are. That meant more than surface-level personalization. It meant designing an experience that could adapt based on intent, product familiarity, and available features.
Challenge
The biggest challenge wasn’t designing the UI, it was aligning the experience with real user goals, when the backend was anything but flexible.
We wanted onboarding to feel intelligent and focused, but we were limited by existing question sets that came through APIs. The options weren’t mobile-friendly, and worse, they didn’t map cleanly to mobile feature availability. We had to redesign the flow and rework how information was passed in, without breaking anything for desktop users or ongoing trials.
Constraints
Static API structures: The questions and answer choices were fixed, coming from legacy systems not built for dynamic onboarding.
Fragmented features across platforms: Mobile didn’t have parity with desktop, but we couldn’t show irrelevant options—especially during first-time setup.
Cross-team dependency: Even small changes required coordination with multiple teams across product and engineering to adjust how data was structured and surfaced.
No room for “just design around it”: This wasn’t a case where design could patch over backend issues. We had to push for real change to deliver an experience that respected the user's context.
Research
App usage data
Before we started, we dove into existing data from Quantum Metric to understand how users were moving through the onboarding flow on desktop and mobile web. We watched real sessions to see where people paused, rushed, skipped, or gave up altogether.
Patterns emerged quickly:
• Users often hit friction when a question felt irrelevant or poorly timed.
• Many skipped ahead when they couldn’t tell how their answers would impact what came next.
• Time-to-completion varied wildly, indicating some users knew exactly what they wanted, and others felt lost.
Interviews
Our mobile research team ran moderated sessions using the live desktop and mobile web flows. We asked participants to talk through their thoughts as they navigated.
Key themes:
• Users didn’t always understand the purpose of the questions.
• They assumed selecting the wrong thing would lock them into a workflow they didn’t want.
• Many were overwhelmed by how early they were being asked to make decisions before they’d seen the product.
Key user stories
As a user, I want to quickly get to the tools that match my goals, without feeling like I’m guessing.
As a user, I want to feel confident the platform can support what I came here to do.
As a user, I want onboarding to feel tailored to me, not like a sales funnel I have to hack my way through.
These stories helped us frame our north star: reduce decision fatigue and increase confidence, without overcomplicating the flow.
Iterations
Our first round of changes tackled two friction points we saw repeatedly in early usage data and UXR:
Platform-Specific Clarity:
We made it clear which features were available on mobile versus web, right within the onboarding flow. Instead of assuming users knew the difference, we met them with the right expectations up front. This shift helped reduce confusion and set a more accurate tone for what the app could do right now.
Conditional Flow Logic:
We also removed the final URL step when users hadn’t indicated they had a website earlier in the flow. It seems small, but cutting that single screen removed a known drop-off point and respected the user’s time. No dead ends. No irrelevant questions.
Early feedback
Initial sessions showed stronger alignment with user expectations.
• Participants appreciated that the experience “didn’t make me guess” what was available where.
• The skipped URL step was seen as a nice surprise—users noted the shorter flow felt “more tailored” and “less like a form and more like a setup guide.”
While we had more to refine, this version validated that reducing irrelevant steps and setting clearer expectations created a smoother, more trustworthy experience from the start.
Follow-Up Feedback & Data
After launching the updated onboarding in the mobile app, follow-up testing and behavioral data told a clearer story:
Users reported greater clarity around the purpose of each step, particularly when it came to which features were app-specific.
Drop-off rates decreased across the mid-funnel steps, especially where we had previously asked users to provide a website regardless of relevance.
We also saw a notable uptick in trial activity beyond onboarding—more users explored the app's core tools instead of bouncing right after setup.
This validated that a little logic goes a long way: by aligning the flow with user context and trimming unnecessary steps, we built more trust—and in turn, more momentum deeper into the product.
Takeaways
Good onboarding meets users where they are, not where we assume they’ll be.
By questioning default patterns and pushing for adaptability in both content and logic, we created a flow that respected the user’s time and intent. Skipping irrelevant steps, clearly surfacing platform limitations, and designing for real-world usage led to a smoother experience and stronger early engagement.
The biggest lesson is that clarity isn’t just kind, it converts.
