← All work

Agency research · Zion & Zion · 2023–24

Retail UX research:
Zara, Costco, Best Buy

Three e-commerce experiences, three separate studies, one method. Each was published as a client white paper with prioritised findings and recommendations.

Type
Agency research at Zion & Zion
Methods
Heuristic evaluation, moderated usability testing, thematic analysis
Participants
Mixed desktop and mobile, ages 25–50, income $19k–$200k
Output
Three white papers with prioritised insights and recommendations
Evidence
Highlight reels cut from UserTesting sessions for each insight
Three retail websites examined under a magnifier, with findings shown as bars beneath them
Same method, three very different shopping behaviours: fast fashion, warehouse membership, electronics.

Method

Each study ran the same way. A heuristic evaluation of the live site established where the experience departed from established practice. Moderated usability testing put real shoppers through the tasks that matter commercially — find a product, judge it, add it to a cart, change your mind, check out. Findings were then grouped by theme and ranked, so the client received a priority order rather than a list of complaints.

Every insight in the papers is backed by a highlight reel from the sessions, which matters more than the percentages: a stakeholder who watches thirty seconds of someone failing to find a size chart stops arguing about whether the problem is real.

session notescan't find searchno size in cartwhere's the price?gave up / backsame failure, three different sites
Tallies from the sessions. The same four failures kept recurring across all three sites.

Zara

Zara's site is built around a minimalist aesthetic. The study found that the aesthetic was doing damage: the same restraint that makes the pages look considered was hiding the controls people needed to shop.

35%of issues were departures from established UX practice
25%came from inaccurate information architecture
20%were accessibility issues
20%came from misreading the customer journey

Insight 01

Navigation and display obstruct browsing

Products on collection pages are laid out without an obvious order, the homepage is dense with graphics at a small type size, and the scroll behaves unconventionally, dropping people into categories they didn't choose. 80% of participants struggled with the navigation menu itself, which is overloaded with text and organised around the brand's structure rather than how people shop.

Insight 02

Critical elements are effectively invisible

Search, login and help are not prominent on the homepage, type is small enough to affect legibility, and the minimal styling makes controls such as the next-category arrow disappear into the background. Half of participants found the search itself ineffective — no autocomplete, no filters in results, and products returned that had nothing to do with the query.

Insight 03

The cart makes people leave to make a small change

Sizes can't be changed in the cart. 90% of participants were frustrated by having to go back to the product page for a one-field change, and abandonment at that step was higher than elsewhere in the journey. Size guides are also placed below the description in small type, so the information needed to buy confidently is the least visible thing on the page.

Insight 04

No reviews, no way back, and slow pages

Every participant expected customer reviews and none were there, which left people uncertain about fit and quality at the point of decision. 60% wanted a clear way back to where they had been, and resorted to clicking the logo or the browser's controls. 55% were frustrated by load times caused by the weight of the homepage graphics.

Costco

Costco succeeds in its warehouses and struggles online. The study located the gap in two places: a catalogue that is hard to move through, and a membership model that hides the one thing shoppers came to check.

50%of dissatisfaction came from hidden pricing and membership barriers
35%from cluttered, poorly organised product pages
25%from restricted and confusing filtering
20%from category pages misrepresenting real inventory

Insight 01

Prices behind a membership wall

Participants reacted strongly to not being able to see prices without logging in, reading it as a lack of transparency rather than a members' benefit, and several said they would simply go elsewhere. Adding to a cart without a membership was also unclear. The recommendation was to show prices to everyone, with a member price revealed on login — transparency first, membership as the upgrade.

Insight 02

Categorisation and labelling defeat product discovery

Category pages are crowded and lack a clear organising principle, descriptions omit specifications and prices, and there are no icons or colour cues, so people must read every line of text to make progress. Search and menu performance compounded it, with results that don't match intent.

Insight 03

Filters and inventory that can't be trusted

The filtering interface is confusing and too limited to narrow a large catalogue. Worse, category pages show items that don't reflect what is actually available, so people lose confidence in the site as a picture of the store. Recommendations covered the categorisation system and real-time availability.

Best Buy

Best Buy has the opposite problem to Zara: not too little, but too much. The features exist — comparison, installation services, deals, filters — and each one is placed or presented in a way that stops people using it.

44%of issues came from inadequate information architecture
44%came from broken user journeys
33%were usability concerns
70%hit problems using the compare feature

Insight 01

Compare is the feature people need most and can use least

70% of participants ran into usability problems with the compare feature. On iPhone the compare button sits behind the scroll-up line, and the interaction gives no instructions, so people couldn't tell what it did or how to use it — on a site selling products that are bought by specification.

Insight 02

Professional installation arrives too late in the journey

The option to pay for and schedule installation appears well after the point at which people are deciding what to buy. Half of participants wanted clear pricing and a convenient date before purchase, and its low prominence meant many didn't know the service existed.

Insight 03

Slow pages break trust in the cart

60% experienced slow loading. The consequence wasn't only impatience: items didn't reliably appear in the cart, and 40% went back to double-check that what they added was really there. Once a shopper doubts the cart, everything after it costs more effort.

Insight 04

Out of stock, discovered last

40% only found out an item was unavailable at the end of the journey, after investing time in choosing it. With an overwhelming main navigation, filters that don't match how people narrow a search, and visual inconsistency across the site, the pattern repeats: effort spent before the information that would have saved it.

Across the three

Three different retail models produced one shared failure. In every case the site withheld the information a person needed at the moment they needed it — a price behind a membership, a size chart below the fold, a stock status at the end of the journey, a comparison hidden behind a scroll line. None of these are visual design problems, and none of them would be fixed by a restyle.

The differences were about where the cost landed. Zara's minimalism hides controls. Costco's density hides products. Best Buy's feature set hides itself. That distinction is what makes the three studies more useful together than separately.

The papers

Each study is written up in full, with the research findings and recommendations per insight:

White paper one → White paper two → White paper three →

Label each link with its retailer before publishing, and check that all three are set to public viewing. Research conducted at Zion & Zion; findings reproduced here with the percentages as reported in the papers.

The mark is S R in braille — from Full Housie!, where the same dots do the same job.