AcreMaps draw polygon feature

01 – Project Overview

Role

UX Designer for AcreMaps

Duration

• Jan 2022 – Feb 2022
• Two sprints (two weeks each)

Background

AcreTrader (AcreMaps parent company) utilizes proprietary technology to facilitate the buying and selling of farmland, one of the largest U.S. real estate sectors, exceeding $3 trillion in value. Our product vision is to see a world where every farm is bought and sold at a fair price. Read the AcreMaps UX case study for more insight into our development process.

AcreMaps is set up to allow users to select land at the level in which it is transacted—that is to say, by parcel. Historically, when analyzing land, our farm analysts noticed discrepancies between parcel data and the actual farmland they were trying to evaluate. This helped us define a more overarching problem.

Problem Statement

As a farmer, farm analyst, or farmland broker, I need to be able to analyze custom boundaries so I can evaluate land that doesn’t fit neatly into parcel lines.

Goal

Allow our users to analyze and evaluate farmland using custom shapes so they can be empowered to buy and sell land smarter.

---

---

02 – Discover

User research

User research began in a multi-faceted way. On the quantitative front, I was able to assess some aspects of our user experience by checking our analytics. We collect data on bounce rates and session duration with Google Analytics, and we record some user sessions on VWO. I analyzed relevant sessions showing shorter durations with the intention of outlining why some users may have been bouncing. One pattern that emerged frequently were users searching, navigating, and arriving on the parcel zoom level with ease, but stopping short of analyzing land before they left the site. In order to further define this project, I took note of our baselines, and tried to dig into reasons why these user behaviors weren’t what we were expecting.

Personas

Our previously established personas were valuable to me throughout this project. In assessing the need for new features, I was intentional about testing with relevant user groups and solving for their problems. All three user groups ended up being relevant in designing for this feature—

• The Farm Analyst
• The Expanding Farmer
• The Farmland Broker

Hypothesis

Once a clearer problem was established through discussion with our farm analysts, we were able to talk through potential hypotheses for a solution. One feature that kept coming up in conversation was the ability to create custom shapes in order to select land that was undefined by our parcel data. Our proposition boiled down to the following—

We believe that giving our users the ability to draw their own fields will result in lower bounce rates and higher satisfaction because it will allow a greater freedom in choosing land to evaluate that doesn’t fit neatly into parcel lines.

---

03 – Define

Competitive usability testing

Once a clear problem and potential hypothesis was established through speaking with our farm analysts, I decided to conduct some competitive usability testing.

AcreMaps had some direct competitors which allowed users to draw fields. With this in mind, I was able to set up and conduct seven individual hour-long sessions with representatives from our persona groups. In these sessions, I set up a testing scenario and had participants complete a list of tasks using competitor’s tools (in varying order, to prevent both primacy and recency biases). These sessions included the following tasks—

• Find AcreTrader’s building (112 W Center St 6th Floor, Fayetteville, AR 72701) and draw a shape around the building.
• Assess the size of the drawn shape (number of acres).
• Adjust one point of the shape.
• Remove the shape.

I recorded this information, pulling out key insights and pain points. I then analyzed this data using the following competitive matrix.

	Competitor #1	Competitor #2	Competitor #3	Competitor #4
Location	No one was immediately able to locate the tool in the search dropdown.	Boundary tool less easy to find. Many thought it should be under tool tips in the top right.	“Draw Your Field” wasn’t immediately clear. May be a copy mistake, or location may be an issue.	Difficult to locate the drawing tool without a label.
Tool Tips	None	Did not notice the tool tips at the bottom of the screen.	None	None
Deleting	Had to restart the page to cancel drawing.	Unclear how to stop drawing.	Deleting process was clear.	Delete options were relatively clear.
Editing	No editing option	No editing option	Editing process needed to be easier.	Edit options were relatively clear.
Speed	Loading times were frustrating.	Loading times were frustrating.	Acceptable	Acceptable
Other Insights	• “Draw Custom Boundaries” makes the user think they can draw right away. • Appreciated the rectangle and circle tools.	• Closing the shape was difficult to do if zoomed out too far. The threshold was too low. • Users liked that “Enter” would close the shape.	• UI unclear when using lighter text. Accessibility issues. • Dark UI hard to see for some.	• List of drawn boundaries was helpful for the user.