1

I'm currently working on a data enrichment flow for credit card holders. We're missing some (for us at least) important data for both main card holders and their extra card holders. Since the same data sets are missing for each user ( their phone numbers, email addresses, , etc.), my client wants to ask all same data fields at the same time, regardless if it contains 1 or 6 card holders on one account. This means a user might be asked to fill out 6 email addresses on one screen.

I'm wondering if asking users to fill in all the same fields for multiple users is a better choice than asking the user to fill in one card holder's details at a time. I have currently designed the flow to be user specific, meaning users fill in the info per card holder.

Unfortunately, extra card holders cannot fill in their own personal data because they cannot access the main portal account. They're simply only issued a card to use, which is monitored/paid for by the main card holder.

So in short my question is: Is it better to:

A: Ask a user to fill in all information for 1 card holder at a time (so: email -> phone number -> etc. -> email -> phone number -> etc.). With 3 card holders, they would have to go through this flow 3 times.

or

B: Ask a user to fill in data field for multiple users at the same time (so: email, email, email -> phone number, phone number, phone number etc.) With 3 card holders, they would have to go through this flow 1 time.

enter image description here

My gut tells me option A is more logical, but takes far more time..

5

I agree that option A makes the most sense. It provides a clear path focused on a single user at a time.

After the main cardholder completes their information, a notification of some kind could request similar information for the extra cardholders.

This way the user experience of entering information would be the same whether it is the main or extra cardholder. The only difference being a prompt at the end for the main cardholder to complete additional steps on behalf of the extra cardholders.

If the main cardholder chooses to enter that workflow, you can inject clear, explicit content reminding them that they're providing this information for a specific extra cardholder on their account.

2

In your case I agree with you, A is more logical. And it's ok to take more time; nobody's collecting efficiency data on your users (I assume).

If your users were business users who had data collected in spreadsheets, then entering that data all at once would probably be better.

2

I think the answer to your question is the same as the answer to the following question:

Which one of the following groups of data points is the most closely related?

**************
*  Option A  *
**************
[John's Phone Number]
[John's Email]
[John's Address]

    OR

**************
*  Option B  *
**************
[John's Phone Number]
[Mary's Phone Number]
[Paul's Phone Number]

If I have three people's contact information, their information will be grouped by the individual, not by the type of data it is. Go with Option A; it will present a more natural progression to the user.

0

Unfortunately, extra card holders cannot fill in their own personal data because they cannot access the main portal account. They're simply only issued a card to use, which is monitored/paid for by the main card holder.

If I understand this correctly, the additional card holders are not "users" in the sense that their requirements should be accommodated in the user interface.

There is only one user - the main cardholder. Your title is a bit misleading.

Flow A is a common implementation and certainly suits a scenario where additional cardholders are not the norm.

However if this particular card is one where multiple additional cardholders are the norm (perhaps some kind of corporate card?), Flow B would make the process faster.

  • I found it a bit tricky to word it; the extra card holders are not users of the platform, but they do use the product and their information is required. They cannot access the web portal, but they can log into the app under their own name. It's messy haha. We do have businesses which use the system, but they would not be able to fill in the personal data (identity related things). – Wanda Oct 24 '17 at 14:03
0

I think this scenario is a bit similar when I need to admin several email accounts from my domain admin, you can edit all users on the same screen with this pattern.enter image description here

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.