The challenge
District comparison, loyalty analysis, and coupon planning are fragmented across spreadsheet workflows.
01 / HERO & PRODUCT SHOWCASE / CVS HEALTH / DISTRICTIQ / RETAIL RESEARCH
BETTER CONTEXT.
BETTER QUESTIONS.
DistrictIQ
From fragmented spreadsheets to explainable district comparisons: a product and UX exploration of loyalty behavior, coupon planning, and the evidence behind a recommendation.
ROLE / PRODUCT DESIGNER · SCOPE / PRODUCT & UX DESIGNAUDIENCE / RESEARCHERS, STRATEGISTS & MANAGERSDELIVERY / STATIC DESIGN FOUNDATION
Independent design concept. Interface data is illustrative. DistrictIQ Overview and Comparison Studio bring district performance, loyalty metrics, coupon redemption trends, and side-by-side analysis into one connected workspace.
02 / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
From a headline to defensible evidence.
THE PROJECT IN 30 SECONDS
- Industry
- Retail / loyalty research
- Role
- Product Designer
- Platform
- Desktop analytics
- Scope
- Retail research workspace
The approach
Design one research workspace with matched context, explainable metrics, and traceable assumptions.
The impact
Eleven connected screens organize district analysis, coupon planning, campaign performance, and saved research around a consistent set of metrics.
03 / PROBLEM & OPPORTUNITY
Disconnected comparisons. Connected decisions.
DistrictIQ brings district comparisons, loyalty-behavior analysis, and coupon planning into a shared workspace. Each screen keeps the selected population, reporting period, metric definitions, and benchmark close to the analysis.
Explore the difference.
Compare districts, inspect behavior, and trace a category gap back to underlying counts and definitions.
Frame the next question.
Connect an analytical signal to offer eligibility and scenario assumptions without promising incremental lift.
Make the case defensible.
Keep the cohort, benchmark, snapshot, and methodology attached when a finding becomes a shared recommendation.
The workspace supports district exploration, offer review, and sharing findings with their supporting context.
04 / DISCOVERY & INSIGHTS
Follow the context behind each finding.
The work combines requirements synthesis, static design inspection, and a heuristic analytical review. It examines information structure, numerical consistency, chart/table access, and how limitations are communicated.
METHOD / 01
Requirements synthesis
Design input
- Connected district comparison, loyalty analysis, and coupon planning in one intended workflow.
- Made cohort context and evidence traceability explicit requirements.
METHOD / 02
Static design inspection
Design observation
- Reviewed the 11-destination structure, with primary attention on Overview, Comparison Studio, Data Management, and the design foundation.
- Checked whether summaries retained a route to underlying values, definitions, and assumptions.
METHOD / 03
Heuristic analytical review
Design observation
- Aggregation, denominator choice, and benchmark labeling change how a comparison should be interpreted.
- Observed response and scenario arithmetic require different language from causal or predictive claims.
Overview establishes the research context, Comparison Studio aligns district metrics, and Data Management explains the definitions behind the charts.
Observation → insight → design implication
Different district exposure counts make a simple mean misleading → comparisons need a consistent denominator → show the summed counts beside the aggregate rate.
05 / STRATEGY & DESIGN DECISIONS
Keep context, calculation, and limitation together.
Keep comparison context visible
- Tension
- A fast summary can hide incompatible populations and reporting periods.
- Options & constraints
- Local filters shorten each page but make cross-view differences harder to explain.
- Design direction
- Use a shared period, cohort, eligibility, and benchmark strip.
- Trade-off
- More context occupies the top of every screen; readers can inspect the basis of a comparison.
Pair a headline with its denominator
- Tension
- A rate is compact but can obscure district size and aggregation.
- Options & constraints
- Chart-only summaries are faster to scan but offer less support for checking exact values.
- Design direction
- Keep counts, metric definitions, units, and exact-value tables near the visual summary.
- Trade-off
- The analytical surface is denser; a finding is easier to interrogate.
Preserve the research record
- Tension
- A saved conclusion can lose its assumptions as data changes.
- Options & constraints
- Snapshot versions keep each saved view connected to its original context.
- Design direction
- Document stable identifiers, snapshot versions, saved context, and scenario assumptions.
- Trade-off
- Snapshot references add detail to the data model while keeping the source of a saved finding visible.
Explore the intended research workflow
The design moves from summary to analysis to detail. The challenge is to make a dense analytical workspace scannable while preserving enough context for a reader to question the headline.
Keep the selection visible.
A common period, district, population, and benchmark strip is designed to travel with the analysis. Reset and restore affordances express recovery intent.
Show the denominator.
Pair rates with counts, units, and definitions. Keep exact-value tables and methodology within reach of charts and findings.
Preserve the argument.
Saved Research and Reports retain the original snapshot and assumptions so a conclusion stays connected to its source.
From a signal to a research record.
- OverviewLocate a district signal
- Comparison StudioCheck comparability
- Coupon IntelligenceTrace category context
- Scenario LabFrame assumptions
- Saved Research / ReportsPreserve the evidence
The screen sequence moves from an overview signal to district comparison, offer review, scenario assumptions, and a saved research record.
06 / ITERATIONS & VALIDATION
A consistent analytical language across screens.
Consistent filter bars, metric cards, tables, and chart legends connect the screens. Selected districts and reporting periods remain visible while the level of analytical detail changes.
What can be inspected
Aggregation rules, benchmark labeling, common context, and routes from summary to exact values.
Connected tasks
Comparison accuracy, denominator comprehension, finding traceability, and restoring saved context.
Supporting detail
Metric definitions, benchmark context, snapshot details, and exact-value tables accompany the headline figures.
07 / FINAL EXPERIENCE
One research journey. Three core capabilities.
Analyze and compare
Overview, District Explorer, Comparison Studio, and Customer Behavior retain a common selection.
Plan and question
Coupon Intelligence, Scenario Lab, and Campaign Performance expose offer context and assumptions.
Preserve and explain
Saved Research, Reports, Data Management, and Settings document provenance and consistent defaults.
PRODUCT CAPABILITIES / SCREEN REVIEW
Eleven destinations.
One research context.
Select a destination to inspect its static design. Open the full-size image for detailed reading.
Overview
A shared research context precedes the headline metrics. Counts, units, selected districts, reporting period, and the regional benchmark remain visible.
1 / 11VIEW FULL SIZE
Explore the design foundation and architecture
The design foundation brings together restrained action color, coordinated analytical series, clear labels, and reusable metric, filter, chart, table, and supporting-state patterns.
A shared vocabulary for the data.
Region → District → Store provides organizational context. DistrictMetric combines period, category, and segment with additive counts. Offers, campaigns, saved scenarios, and research workspaces use stable IDs and snapshot versions to preserve provenance.
Data Management connects regions, districts, stores, reporting periods, offers, and research snapshots. Supporting patterns show focus treatments, chart alternatives, and recoverable interface states.
08 / OUTCOMES & IMPACT
A connected view of retail research.
Eleven destinations connect high-level performance summaries with detailed district comparisons, offer research, campaign records, and metric definitions.
Comparable district views
Cohort selections, denominators, and exact values stay within reach of the summary charts.
Findings with context
Reports pair executive summaries with district comparisons, methodology, and exact-value appendices.
A consistent design language
Eleven application screens share a design foundation, metric vocabulary, and consistent data presentation.
09 / REFLECTION & NEXT STEPS
Decision quality depends on what stays visible.
Understand real work.
Interview researchers, strategists, and managers, then observe an authorized research task and the workbooks it depends on.
Agree on the metric contract.
Audit anonymized definitions, eligibility rules, denominators, deduplication, provenance, and permissible claim language.
Test the intended journey.
Assess district comparison, denominator interpretation, finding traceability, and context recovery in an implemented experience.
The central design decision
Keep the question, the calculation, and the limitation close enough to read together. Decision quality depends on comparability, provenance, and explainability.