The Situation
The tool had investment. It didn't have trust.
Stylists play a vital role in delivering a retailer's high-touch, personalized service model — they're the frontline of client relationships and a meaningful driver of full-price sales and loyalty. The brand had made significant investment in a digital tool built specifically to support them. Adoption stayed low. Teams on the ground continued to rely on workarounds, and the tool wasn't earning traction with the very people it was built for.
Leadership was weighing two expensive paths forward: rebuild the tool from scratch, or invest in a third-party solution. Both carried real cost and time. Neither was grounded in a clear understanding of what was actually failing and why.
Rather than defaulting to assumption-based decisions, a research-led approach was proposed — to clarify the problem before committing to a solution. The goal was to understand where the tool was breaking down, and why it wasn't earning trust or traction with its intended users.
Research Approach
Understanding the job, not just the interface.
A standard usability audit would have surfaced friction in the UI. But the real question was different: what does success look like in a stylist's day-to-day workflow — and what was getting in the way? A Jobs-to-Be-Done study was designed to answer it across two complementary streams.
In-depth interviews and jobs mapping — across all stylist types
Qualitative sessions with in-store, digital, market, and top-performing stylists to map what each role needed to succeed — and where the tool supported or fell short. Talking to all four types mattered: shared needs pointed to fundamental gaps; differences between roles revealed where a single solution had been trying to serve too many jobs at once.
Quantitative validation — 500+ stylists
To confirm the qualitative findings weren't outliers, a survey was run across 500+ stylists to measure the prevalence and urgency of each unmet need. The data was unambiguous: adoption wasn't a result of resistance — it was a result of unmet expectations. The gaps identified in interviews weren't edge cases. They were the norm.
"The tool wasn't failing because of bad design. It was failing because it was missing the two things that define the stylist's job — knowing how you're performing, and knowing your clients."
Key Findings
Two missing functions. Both hiding in plain sight.
Across all stylist types, the same two gaps surfaced as critical. They weren't nice-to-haves. They were fundamental to the job — and their absence made the app unusable in the eyes of many stylists.
No sales tracking or commission visibility
Stylists had no way to see their own earnings or performance data within the app. Without commission visibility, it was hard to stay motivated, measure personal impact, or prioritize which clients to reach out to. Performance felt invisible — which made the tool feel pointless. Stylists who cared most about results had the least reason to open it.
No accessible customer book
Stylists couldn't easily access client details, preferences, or purchase history within the app. The ability to deliver personalized experiences — recalling what a client loves, what they've bought, what they mentioned last time — is the entire value proposition of a stylist relationship. Without a client book, the tool had no connection to the job that defines the role.
Turning Insight Into Strategy
A clear recommendation — whether they rebuilt or bought.
Armed with qualitative findings and quantitative confirmation, the next step was partnering with product and business leaders to translate the research into a clear direction. The recommendation was unambiguous: whether the team chose to rebuild or bring in a third-party solution, the next tool had to prioritize these two functions above everything else. They weren't features to add on the roadmap. They were north stars for the investment decision.
Sales tracking and commission visibility as a core requirement — Stylists needed to see their own earnings and performance data inside the tool. Without it, the app had no daily pull. Commission visibility became a non-negotiable criterion in the build-vs-buy evaluation — and the primary driver of reopens after launch.
Customer book access as the foundation of personalization — Client details, purchase history, preferences, and stylist notes needed to be easily accessible, not buried. The customer book wasn't a nice-to-have feature — it was the job. Any solution that didn't put it front and center was solving the wrong problem.
The Outcome
105 to 347 active users within a month — and a smarter investment decision.
Active users jumped from 105 to 347 within a month of launching the redesign with the two missing functions at its core. The app had been unusable in the eyes of many stylists — not because of poor design, but because it was missing the two things fundamental to the job. Once those were there, adoption followed without friction.
The improvements did more than lift a number. The app became a strategic tool that empowered stylists to work smarter, drive sales, and strengthen client relationships. Beyond the usage figures, the research delivered something harder to build: a shared, evidence-backed understanding of stylist needs that united product, business, and frontline leaders — and made both the rebuild and the costly third-party replacement unnecessary.
Results
347
active users within a month — up from 105 before the redesign
500+
stylists surveyed — confirming findings weren't outliers, they were the norm
1
clear build-vs-buy direction delivered, unifying stakeholders around a shared understanding