Anastasia Krasteleva - Senior Product Designer

Context

The product is a marketplace for automotive services operating in 13 European countries. It connects two types of users: automotive workshops and drivers. Workshops register on the platform and create a dedicated page to advertise their services, providing details such as location, phone number, working hours, scope of services, specialisation, prices, etc. Drivers can search for workshops by various parameters, then contact a chosen workshop by phone to arrange an appointment.

The goal of this project was to digitise the communication between drivers and workshops by developing a system for online appointment booking and management. This new system would allow drivers to book a visit with a selected workshop online, and enable workshops to handle these online requests. This approach implied the following key benefits for all parties involved:

For drivers

The online booking system introduces a new way to arrange an appointment at a workshop, which can significantly improve the customer experience in various scenarios. For example, when filling out the booking form, drivers won’t be caught off guard by technical questions (such as VIN or engine model) that they may not have immediate answers to. Instead, they can take their time to find the necessary details in their documents without feeling rushed.

The platform sends automatic reminders for upcoming visits, so drivers are less likely to forget an appointment (unlike a booking made via phone, which the driver has to remember on their own).

The system ensures transparency: all repair activities are approved digitally by the driver. This eliminates unexpected charges on the bill and removes the need to sign paper offers.

For workshops

The online booking system provides a competitive advantage in the segment of clients who prefer digital communication for services.

It can help reduce no-shows, thanks to automated reminders sent to drivers before appointments.

For the owner of the marketplace

Providing the new tool to B2B customers (workshops) increases their overall loyalty to the marketplace and encourages them to use other digital products within the company’s ecosystem.

The project team included: Product Owner, Business Analyst, 2–3 UX/UI Designers (at different stages of the project), Front-End and Back-End Developers, QA Engineers, and Business Specialists.

My role

I was the Lead Designer on this project, driving the design process end-to-end. I conducted user research and usability testing sessions, created user flows, and proposed design solutions which I then translated into interactive prototypes. I presented ideas and design decisions to stakeholders, explaining the reasoning behind them. Once features were approved, I produced high-fidelity mockups and prepared design specifications for development. I collaborated closely with developers during refinements to clarify the intended behaviour and logic of features, I helped create and groom Jira tasks. Additionally, I mentored other designers on the team and coordinated our design efforts by distributing tasks and maintaining consistency across our work.

Research

Since the marketplace product was already active in multiple countries, our initial research goal was to understand how it was used in each region by identifying specific local needs as well as common patterns. To gather these insights, our design team organised a 2-day in-person workshop with business representatives from each local market. These participants were responsible for the product in their respective countries and were involved in collecting and analysing user feedback, which made them reliable sources of insight into both drivers and automotive workshops in their regions. The event included brainstorming sessions, group exercises, and other activities that helped us better understand users across different countries: their habits, behaviour patterns, common issues, and lifestyle factors influencing how they use automotive services.

After digitising and analysing the collected research materials, we identified the following key challenges:

Unclear problems

Many calls to workshops do not correspond to a clearly identified problem. Drivers often don’t know what exactly is wrong with their car or what service they need, so their initial inquiries are vague.

Different levels of job complexity

Regular maintenance tasks, such as routine servicing or tyre changes, follow predictable timelines and require predefined parts. Workshops often have dedicated stations or staff for this type of work. In contrast, complex repairs are less predictable and may take significantly longer.

Unexpected issues

Mechanics frequently discover unexpected problems during a repair and need to suggest additional work to the driver, which requires additional communication and approval.

Delayed start of work

Workshops don’t always begin repairs immediately when a car is dropped off. They might be busy with other customers or need time to obtain necessary spare parts before starting the work.

User Flows

Using the research insights, we developed detailed user flow diagrams to illustrate the entire service process for both the driver and the workshop. We mapped out each step, from the moment a driver requests a repair to the point where the driver leaves feedback after the repair is completed. In a nutshell, the happy path for both types of users looks like this:

Submit booking request

The driver fills out an online booking form with information about their car, the preferred visit time, and the issue (or selects the required services from a list).

Register

If the driver is not already registered, they can sign up and go through a brief onboarding process.

Optional

Accept the offer

The driver receives an offer from the workshop. It includes the proposed services and spare parts, an estimated cost, and the available time for the visit. The driver reviews the offer and accepts it if everything looks good.

Request for schedule adjustment

If the proposed date/time doesn't suit the driver anymore, they can request a different appointment slot.

Optional

Confirm rescheduling

If the workshop proposes a new date/time, the driver reviews and accepts the new appointment slot.

If applicable

Get appointment reminder and drop-off the car

Before the visit, the system sends the driver an automatic reminder about the upcoming appointment. The driver delivers the car to the workshop at the scheduled time.

Approve additional work

If the workshop finds additional issues during the service, they send a separate offer for the additional work. The driver reviews it and approves or rejects it.

If applicable

Get car ready notification and pickup the car

When the car is ready, the driver receives a notification proceeds with pickup.

Leave a review

After the repair is done and the car is picked up, the driver can leave a review for the workshop on the marketplace.

Optional

Receive request

The workshop receives a notification about a new booking request submitted by a driver, including information about the car, the described issue or selected services, and the preferred visit time.

Create offer

The workshop reviews the booking request and prepares an offer. The offer includes a list of recommended services and spare parts, an estimated cost, and a proposed appointment date and time based on the driver’s preferences.

Order spare parts

Once the driver accepts the offer, the workshop orders the spare parts included in the offer to prepare for the appointment (note that not all service activities require spare parts).

If applicable

Request for schedule adjustment

If the workshop experiences an unexpected schedule change and the approved appointment date or time is no longer suitable, they can propose an alternative time slot to the driver.

Optional

Confirm rescheduling

If the driver requests a new date/time, the workshop reviews and accepts the new appointment slot.

If applicable

Register car drop-off

On the appointment date, the driver arrives at the workshop and leaves the car there. The workshop registers the drop-off in the system.

Propose additional work

If the mechanic finds unexpected issues during the job, the workshop can update the driver via the system by sending an additional offer.

Optional

Order spare parts for additional work

If the driver accepts the additional offer and the work requires spare parts, the workshop orders the parts included in the new offer.

If applicable

Complete service and notify driver

Once the repair is completed, the workshop marks the job as finished in the system, which triggers a notification to the driver.

Reply to the review

If the driver leaves a review in the marketplace after the booking is completed, the workshop can publicly reply to thank the driver or address any feedback.

Optional

Our final diagrams contained much more detail and covered not only the happy path, but also cancellations, expirations, and no-shows. They described the logic and timing of notifications and reminders sent via email and/or SMS. The informational entities required for the process were also included.

By mapping these flows, we ensured the design covered real-life car repair scenarios. This also helped identify areas where the system needed flexibility to address user challenges and pain points (for example, allowing schedule changes or iterative offers).

Design System

After finalising the flows and prototyping, we moved into UI design. A special focus was placed on establishing a design system for the new features, with future platform-wide scalability in mind. Although the marketplace had existed for more than 10 years at that point, it did not have a unified design system. This project therefore became an opportunity to introduce a modern, consistent set of UI components for the product.

I led the creation of the new design system, ensuring it aligned with the platform’s current look-and-feel while improving consistency and accessibility. I built a library of components in Figma, each with states and clear usage guidelines. This is an example of how I worked with interactive elements such as buttons, analysing suitable background colours for their use.

Once the core design library was established, I worked closely with front-end developers to implement it. As I prepared the Figma components, developers created corresponding components in our Storybook library. I reviewed their implementations to ensure alignment with the design specifications in terms of visual appearance and behaviour. We treated the design system as an internal product, continuously reviewing, improving, and expanding it. As a result, we arrived at the following library structure:

Although the design system required an initial investment of time and resources, it ultimately accelerated the delivery of the online booking feature and established a scalable foundation for future product development.

Interfaces and Visual Design

The scope of this project was extensive. We created a comprehensive set of screens covering all driver and workshop scenarios. Here, I will highlight a few key interface designs from the driver’s perspective, since the workshop side was part of a private B2B portal (accessible only to registered businesses, which limits what can be shared publicly).

One core element of the driver experience is the online booking form. In the first step, users are asked to choose how they want to proceed: either by selecting specific services or by describing an issue if they are unsure what needs to be done.

If drivers choose to select services, they can pick from a predefined list of the most popular options or use search. If they are unsure, they can describe the issue in their own words. For the workshop, this means performing diagnostics first and proposing the required services as additional work afterward.

The next step involves specifying vehicle details so the workshop can prepare for the visit and order the necessary spare parts in advance. If the user is registered and logged in, they can simply select a vehicle from the list saved in their account.

For the step of selecting the visit date and time, we prepared two options. The first option is a simple selection of an available time slot. The second option involves a scheduling negotiation flow: the driver initially specifies a preferred time in the booking form, and the workshop then responds with an offer that includes a proposed date and time.

The first approach is highly convenient for routine maintenance services with predictable durations, but it requires greater effort due to integration with the workshop’s calendar system. By “effort,” I mean not only development work, but also the involvement of local company representatives who communicate directly with workshops to introduce new features and assist with issues in the company’s applications when needed. Considering that not all automotive workshops use digital calendars, the overall effort required to successfully roll out time-slot booking could be substantial.

As a result, we decided to create a proof of concept and launch time-slot booking in a single country and only for tyre changes, in order to evaluate whether this approach delivers sufficient value to justify broader implementation.

After entering personal details and reviewing the form summary, the driver can submit the request. If the user is registered and logged in, they can immediately track their request in their personal account. If not, they will be prompted to create an account.

The mockups shown above do not represent a single linear flow. Instead, they illustrate variations across different steps of the booking process and provide an overall view of the interface. Below, you can see the structure of the booking form mockups as they were prepared for development.

This is how the workshop’s offer appears in the driver’s account interface on desktop. However, both registered and unregistered users can also review the offer details via email.

Development Collaboration

Throughout development, the design team worked hand in hand with developers to ensure the final product matched our design intent. We held regular refinement meetings to review user stories and corresponding design details. During these sessions, I clarified the intended behavior of interactive elements and addressed any questions from engineers regarding logic as well.

When we encountered edge cases that were not fully covered in the initial designs, I quickly created additional mockups or adjustments to address those scenarios. We maintained a tight feedback loop: as developers implemented features, designers conducted UX/UI reviews after QA had completed their testing. This collaborative approach allowed us to catch potential issues early and ensured a smooth, polished user experience.

User Testing & Improvements

After releasing the MVP (Minimum Viable Product) of the online booking system, we gathered feedback through usability testing with real users on both sides (drivers and workshop employees). This testing phase uncovered a few UX issues and opportunities for improvement.

On the driver side

We identified several areas where users hesitated or became confused. We compiled these findings and presented them to the Product Owner together with the possible solutions, then worked with the team to prioritise which issues to address immediately and which to defer to a later phase (see the template below).

We released an update focused first on driver-side improvements, as these represented quick wins. This update included correcting misleading copy, adjusting the default filtering on the bookings page, and removing unnecessary elements. We also improved the registration flow by introducing an auto sign-in pattern, allowing users to access their account immediately after email verification without an additional sign-in step.

On the workshop side

For workshops, the process proved to be more complex. During user testing, the main challenge for workshop staff was understanding how to work with offers. Most of them had previously been using another company application to create offers. Although this application was linked to the online booking system, it required changes in established user habits, which often caused confusion and hesitation.

This integration approach was initially chosen because it was the simplest from a technical perspective and allowed us to launch the MVP as quickly as possible. However, user testing revealed that this solution was not optimal for workshop users. As a result, we concluded that greater investment was needed in the workshop-side experience and that the overall approach should be revised. Instead of introducing a separate product integrated with an existing tool, we should incorporate booking management functionality directly into the offers application. How this was implemented is a separate, larger story, but I can say that all these changes were again validated through user testing with a subset of workshops, and the feedback was significantly more positive the second time around.

We also validated the time-slot booking concept under real business conditions, as described above. This flow was launched in one marketplace country and limited to the tyre change service. After one full season of testing, the decision was made to discontinue this approach due to economic infeasibility. The manual scheduling negotiation flow proved sufficient, covering all identified needs.

Summary & Outcomes

We successfully launched the online booking system across all 13 countries where the marketplace operates. This new feature has created a smoother and more transparent experience for both drivers and workshops:

Drivers can easily request services online, avoid phone tag with workshops, and rely on automatic reminders eliminating the risk of missed appointments. The digital record of quotes and approvals also gives them confidence and clarity about the work being done on their car.

Workshops can efficiently manage incoming requests, use digital offers to clarify expectations with customers, and fill their schedule more optimally. We received feedback from some workshops that online booking has become a key tool in shaping their competitive strategy.

We were able to tackle the main challenges identified during research through design: