Assem Soliman

Case Studies

Three projects. Real research. Real impact.

01

Why users dropped off the product page — and what we did about it

User Interviews Surveys Figma Typeform

The Problem

A significant share of users who viewed Invygo's Product Detail Page (PDP) left without converting. The PM and design team assumed it was a pricing problem. I was asked to find out why.

My Role

End-to-end ownership — solo. Wrote the research plan, recruited participants, ran all interviews, designed and distributed the Typeform survey, synthesised findings, and presented to product and design leadership.

Research Approach

50+ structured and semi-structured user interviews to understand emotional and cognitive friction on the PDP. 200+ Typeform survey respondents to validate findings at scale. Sessions conducted in Arabic and English across KSA and UAE users.

What I Found

Pricing wasn't the issue. The problem was trust and information architecture. Users didn't understand what was included in the price, couldn't find cancellation terms, and didn't see enough social proof to feel confident committing.

Key Findings

73%

of users couldn't explain what the subscription price included

68%

wanted cancellation terms before they would consider subscribing

3 of 4

users cited missing trust signals as a reason to leave without converting

"I wanted to subscribe, but I didn't know what happens if I need to return the car early. That scared me away."

— Interview participant, KSA, age 28

"The price looks fine. I just don't understand what I'm paying for. Is insurance included? What about maintenance?"

— Interview participant, UAE, age 34

Impact

Research findings directly drove a full product page redesign. The new PDP added a pricing breakdown module, moved cancellation terms above the fold, and introduced trust markers (reviews, guarantees, coverage explainer). Figma annotations from this study were used directly in the design handoff.

↗ View Figma artifacts

02

Finding the real cause of subscription churn — across four teams

Stakeholder Interviews Internal Discovery FigJam Confluence

The Problem

Subscription churn was increasing and each team had a different explanation. Growth blamed the product. Product blamed operations. Operations blamed sales targeting. No one had a shared picture of the problem.

My Role

Designed and led a cross-functional discovery sprint — stakeholder interviews across Growth, Product, Operations, and Partnerships. Synthesised four conflicting team perspectives into a single unified problem map.

Research Approach

Structured stakeholder interviews with representatives from all four teams. Affinity mapping in FigJam to surface patterns across conflicting viewpoints. Process mapping to trace the customer journey from acquisition through cancellation.

What I Found

All three teams were partially right. The churn was caused by a 3-way failure operating in sequence: the wrong users were being targeted → the product didn't meet their expectations → operations couldn't deliver reliably enough to recover trust.

Key Findings

"We're marketing the car subscription as flexible, but our minimum commitment is longer than users expect when they arrive. We're setting up a mismatch before they even subscribe."

— Growth team stakeholder

"Ops gets blamed for late deliveries, but half the time the booking was confirmed before we had confirmed availability. The failure starts before we're even in the loop."

— Operations team stakeholder

Impact

Delivered a unified research report and FigJam board that gave all four teams a shared understanding of the churn mechanism for the first time. Recommendations were split by team ownership — each team received a prioritised action list tied to their specific contribution to the failure chain. The report was presented to senior leadership and used to align the Q2 roadmap.

03

From spreadsheets and WhatsApp to a live internal tool — Convoy

Discovery Research Usability Testing Figma

The Problem

Invygo's operations team was managing vehicle logistics — vehicle status, driver assignments, delivery schedules — across spreadsheets and WhatsApp messages. Errors were frequent and the team had no single source of truth.

My Role

Led discovery research that defined the product requirements for Convoy, Invygo's internal fleet management tool. Drove the research from the first stakeholder interview through to usability testing of the live MVP.

Research Approach

Process observation and contextual interviews with the ops team to map their actual workflow — not the assumed one. Identified five manual handoff points that caused errors. Ran usability testing rounds on Figma prototypes before build and on the live app post-launch.

What I Found

The team's main pain was not the volume of work — it was the lack of visibility. At any moment, nobody knew the definitive status of a vehicle without making three calls. Every handoff was a potential error. The tool needed to create one shared, live view before anything else.

Key Findings

5

manual handoff points identified as error sources

0

single sources of truth existed before Convoy

100%

of ops staff said status visibility was the #1 need

Impact

Convoy was built and deployed to production — one of the first research-to-ship cycles in Invygo's history. The tool replaced spreadsheet-and-WhatsApp operations with a live fleet status dashboard. Research artifacts (journey maps, annotated process flows, usability test findings) were handed directly to the engineering team and used throughout the build.

↗ View live project

How I Work

Research is a craft, not a checklist.

Step 01

Brief & Align

Understand the question behind the question. Align with PM and design on what decision this research needs to enable — before writing a single survey question.

Step 02

Plan & Recruit

Write the research plan, choose the method mix, design the screener, and recruit the right participants. Bad recruitment is where most research fails before it starts.

Step 03

Field Research

Interviews, surveys, observation. I run sessions in Arabic and English. The goal is to get past what users say and find out what they actually do and feel.

Step 04

Synthesis

Affinity mapping, pattern finding, theme clustering. Raw data becomes structured insight. This is where the research either earns its keep or disappears into a folder.

Step 05

Artifacts

Figma boards, empathy maps, personas, journey maps, research reports. Every study ends with something a designer can open and use immediately — not a 40-slide deck.

Step 06

Present & Ship

Stakeholder readout tailored to the audience — PM, design, or leadership. Recommendations prioritised by impact. Then I follow up to make sure it actually shapes the product.

About

I'm a UX researcher based in Egypt with experience supporting design and product teams in the KSA and UAE markets. I joined Invygo — a car subscription platform — as one of the first dedicated researchers on the team, running end-to-end studies from brief to design-ready deliverable.

Over the past 2+ years I've run studies spanning qualitative depth and quantitative scale: 50+ user interviews and 200+ survey respondents in the same project, because the best research uses both. I conduct sessions in Arabic and English — which matters in a KSA market where user sentiment lives in one language and product decisions in another.

I care about research that moves into design. Every study ends with Figma artifacts — empathy maps, personas, journey maps, annotated prototypes — that a designer can open and use immediately. The Convoy project — a production tool I drove from the first interview through usability testing to deployment — is the study I'm most proud of. Research that doesn't stay in a report. It goes into the work.

End-to-end ownership

Brief → plan → recruit → interview → synthesise → present. Solo, A to Z.

Mixed-methods

Qualitative depth and quantitative scale in the same study. Both, not either.

Cross-functional

PM, design, growth, ops, partnerships — research shaped for each audience.

Bilingual researcher

Arabic + English. User sessions and stakeholder presentations in both.

Skills & Tools

Research Methods

User Interviews

Structured & semi-structured · Arabic + English · 50+ conducted

Usability Testing

Figma prototype testing & live app task-based sessions · friction identification

Observations

Contextual inquiry · workflow observation · process mapping

Participant Recruitment

Screener design · recruitment coordination · session scheduling

Surveys

Quantitative design & analysis · 200+ respondents across studies

Synthesis & Delivery

Empathy Mapping

Individual user maps → cross-user synthesis patterns

User Personas

Research-backed · grounded in interview data, not assumptions

Journey Mapping

Full user journey · drop-off identification · opportunity mapping

Research Reports

Executive summaries · prioritised recommendations · confidence levels

Stakeholder Presentations

Findings framed for PM, design, and leadership audiences

Tools

Figma & FigJam

UX annotations · before/after designs · research boards · empathy maps

Miro

Collaborative synthesis · affinity mapping · workshop facilitation

Typeform

Survey design · distribution · response analysis

Confluence

Research documentation · findings reports · internal knowledge base

Google Forms & Sheets

Arabic-language surveys · quantitative data analysis

Notion

Stakeholder-facing documentation · research organisation

Open to UX researcher roles — full-time, on-site Riyadh or remote.

✉ assemahme557@gmail.com ↗ LinkedIn ↗ Figma Work ↗ Live Project

All research in this portfolio has been reviewed for confidentiality. User first names are used with participants' consent. Internal metrics have been generalised where appropriate.