INTERNAL USE ONLY

Ancillary Motor Insurance

User Testing Report

V2.2Richard JohnstonMay 2012

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Executive Summary

we are experience conducted user testing on behalf of Zurich Insurance to review customer understanding of ancillary options on Zurich’s motor insurance price presentation page.

Overall, ancillary insurance products were visible and understood.

Cover options identified at the aggregatorParticipants formed an opinion of what is included in the insurance from the aggregator, and understood the likely price implications.

Preselected options noticed Overall, participants noticed that there were pre-selected options and the interactions needed to add and remove them were intuitive.

Preselected options wanted by customersLegal and personal accident cover were seen as necessary items, and were expected to be included by default.

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Introduction

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Research objectives

we are experience conducted user testing on behalf of Zurich Insurance to review customer understanding of ancillary options on Zurich’s motor insurance price presentation page.

Focusing on the aggregator user journey, the main aims of the research were to:•Test users’ ability to notice the pre-selection of the Legal, and Medical Assistance cover•Check whether the interactions to select and deselect all options were easy to use•Validate users’ understanding of the extra product options

Background

Objectives

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Who we talked to

General Profile

10 participants all to an intermediate standard using computers and familiar with buying motor insurance online. Each had renewed their car insurance within the past 12 months.

We ensured candidates were drawn across an even split of ages from 22-55, and included both males and females.

Sample Breakdown

5 x female participants.

5 x male participants.

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Wrap-up

Reflection on the positives and

challenges identified in the session.

Review of the sites

Investigation of the effectiveness of the user experience using

observational techniques and the ‘think aloud’ protocol.

Context

Exploration of behaviours and attitudes that

affect usage of site

How we ran the lab-based sessions

Session structure

Introduction5-10 minutes

Session wrap-up5-10 minutes

Body of the session 20 minutes

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Summary results

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Summary results

Preselected options:•Nearly everyone noticed that Legal Cover and Personal Accident cover were preselected•Everyone noticed the ability to remove Legal Cover and Personal Accident cover•Nearly everyone understood product information about Legal Cover and Personal Accident cover•Everyone sought Legal Cover, nearly everyone personal accident cover

•Everyone noticed that Breakdown, Key Care, Excess Protection, and Hire Car Cover could be added•Everyone noticed the ability to remove (following a selection) Excess Protection and Hire Car Cover, nearly everyone for the Breakdown and Key Care Cover•Product information for Breakdown, Key Care and Excess Protection was understood by nearly everyone, Hire Car by just over half•Few participants sought cover for the Breakdown, Key Care, Excess Protection or Hire Car cover options

Other options:

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Detailed findings

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Cover options identified at the aggregator

Participants formed an opinion of what is included from the aggregatorAs part of their selection process, participants compared the details of what cover is provided, and whether there would be any additional costs to the main price quoted.

Participants were observed scanning the page to identify which insurers included these as part of the list price, and took this into consideration before further investigating a particular quote.

However, the options need further explanationThough giving a basic ability to compare on price, the simple headings used to describe the cover options don’t do enough to give an understanding of what they are. Users expected to be given this information when either visiting the insurer’s site, or enquiring directly on the phone.

“Maybe there could be explanations of what the

cover meant”Sharlene, Commercial property manager

“Maybe there could be explanations of what the

cover meant”Sharlene, Commercial property manager

“Personal accident cover, with Zurich you have to pay extra for

it”Harry, Investment Trader

“Personal accident cover, with Zurich you have to pay extra for

it”Harry, Investment Trader

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Preselected options clearly identified

Though not always the first thing to grab the attention of users, nearly all participants realised that the Legal Cover and Personal Accident Cover options had been included by default.

Some noticed this immediately as a result of the price difference from the aggregator, though the majority picked it up as they weighed up which options they wished to include. The ability to recognise the inclusion of these products is aided by the page’s clear layout; grouping these alongside all the other products as ‘important optional extras’.

Only two users read the green text on right of the page which indicated why the preselected options had been included by default. In this instance it is not an issue as participants noticed the pre-selected options, however it should be noted that this design does not attract attention.

“Whereas before [on the aggregator] there was ticks, it

seems they’ve [legal & personal accident cover] been included”Tracey, Mental health services co-ordinator”

“Whereas before [on the aggregator] there was ticks, it

seems they’ve [legal & personal accident cover] been included”Tracey, Mental health services co-ordinator”

“That’s why the price has gone up”

Geoff, Retired accountant

“That’s why the price has gone up”

Geoff, Retired accountant

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Pre-selected options simple to remove and reselect

The calls to action were effectiveParticipants understood that the ‘Remove’ link would remove the Legal or Personal Accident Cover. This link caused users to question the necessity to purchase these products.

Participants were clear about the options they had selectedAfter eventually clicking on the ‘Buy now’ button, and as final task during the testing, participants were asked to re-iterate what policy options had been selected. All participants were able to correctly recall exactly which options they had committed to purchase.

“I do like it, it gives you the option to remove these”

Dale, Revenue collector

“I do like it, it gives you the option to remove these”

Dale, Revenue collector

“I’d leave [on] legal cover, take off personal accident”

Karen, Reflexologist

“I’d leave [on] legal cover, take off personal accident”

Karen, Reflexologist

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Pre-selected options wanted by participants

Participants had a general understanding of the Legal and Personal Accident Cover based on their previous experiences either buying insurance themselves, or discussing the subject with family and friends.

People stated an expectation that this should already be part of their cover, rather than having to select them as extras. Participants either viewed them as ‘essentials’ , or viewed them as worth purchasing simply because the cost outweighed the risk of being without this cover.

However, most participants decided against adding the other options (Breakdown Cover, Key Care, Excess Protect cover and Hire Car) as they were wary of price.

Participants understood that all of these were optional.

“It’s just piece of mind”

Marlon, Retail manager

“It’s just piece of mind”

Marlon, Retail manager

“It’s worth having… because in the long run these things can

cost a lot”Nick, Litigation broker

“It’s worth having… because in the long run these things can

cost a lot”Nick, Litigation broker

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Participants were unclear about a couple of options

Participants were generally more unclear about the Excess Protect Cover and Hire car options.

Participants were unfamiliar with Excess Protect Cover, and though generally intrigued by the sound of it, the amount of information given on the site was insufficient in giving users a reason to add it to their policy.

The ‘Hire Car’ option was viewed as being redundant as participants struggled to distinguish it from the ‘replacement car’ service listed in the ‘benefits automatically included’ section. More clearly stating what can be gained from this product (beyond what is included automatically) will increase the likelihood of its selection.

“Maybe some clearer examples might help. Y’know, like ‘if you

were to be in this sort of accident, and this were to happen’, then you

would be entitled to x,y, and z”Tracey H, Housing officer

“Maybe some clearer examples might help. Y’know, like ‘if you

were to be in this sort of accident, and this were to happen’, then you

would be entitled to x,y, and z”Tracey H, Housing officer

“Excess cover sounds interesting, I’d like to know

more”Tracey, Mental health services co-

ordinator

“Excess cover sounds interesting, I’d like to know

more”Tracey, Mental health services co-

ordinator

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Customers prefer an upfront price

A number of participants commented on the tag stating ‘buy online for our best prices’, saying they wished to know what the likely difference was, and would like an idea of the amount they could expect to save.

Without this information users suggested they would be likely to call Zurich to find out exactly what the difference would be. Even if rough amounts or percentages were given, users would feel reassured that buying online was indeed getting them the best deal, and in turn be less inclined to phone.

“This is getting like Ryan air”Tracey H, Housing officer

“This is getting like Ryan air”Tracey H, Housing officer

“How much discount?”Dale, Revenue collector

“How much discount?”Dale, Revenue collector

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Appendix

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Two types of customers were identified

Information seekersWe clearly noticed a split in users’ purchasing behaviour. Four of the ten we interviewed simply used aggregator sites as a quick reference tool to highlight insurers giving cheapest deals to meet their needs. These users would visit the insurers’ sites to get a better idea of the cover options provided but stated they would then most likely call.Often they believed they would be able to negotiate a better deal over the phone.

Those ready to payOn the other hand, six out of ten participants felt that as an inherently pressurised task, going online to renew their insurance makes the process quick and easy.

“I use aggregators to get baseline figures… then call to

find out more”Sharlene, Commercial property manager

“I use aggregators to get baseline figures… then call to

find out more”Sharlene, Commercial property manager

“It’s quite frustrating, I just call them”

Tracey H, Housing officer

“It’s quite frustrating, I just call them”

Tracey H, Housing officer

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Participants’ background details

Name

Age Profession Aggregator/s used

Current insurer (information given at particpant’s discretion)

Harry 44 Investment Trader Money supermarket, go compare

Swiftcover

Tracey 47 Mental services co-ordinator

Confused.com, compare the market

Tracey H 35 Housing officer Go compare, compare the market

Sharlene 32 Commercial property manager

Money supermarket Kwikfit

Dale 30 Revenue officer Money supermarket

Marlon 29 Retail manager Money supermarket Insure the box

Geoff 55 Retired accountant Confused.com More than

Merline 38 Education administrator Money supermarket

Nick 39 Litigation broker Go compare, Money supermarket

Karen 51 Reflexologist Compare the market

INTERNAL USE ONLY

Thank you

Richard JohnstonResearcher

Billie AndersenSenior Researcher

hello@weareexperience.com+44(0)20 7 199 1321