alena.zhem@gmail.com
Product Designer with a background
in graphic design. I work on large-scale
e-commerce products, focusing on UX, product thinking, and visual clarity to turn complex flows into clear, usable experiences.
CV
alena.zhem@gmail.com
Product Designer with a background
in graphic design. I work on large-scale
e-commerce products, focusing on UX, product thinking, and visual clarity to turn complex flows into clear, usable experiences.
CV
My role - product designer
Scope - ui, design systems, brainstorming
Team - audit, data analyst, product designer,
product manager, business team
Stroili had just redesigned their entire e-commerce site. The product listing pages improved. But the product detail page — the single most important page for purchase decisions — got worse. Exit rates climbed, add-to-cart dropped, and users were rage-clicking on elements that weren't interactive.
I designed an alternative PDP, and validated it through structured user testing with 16 participants. Several of my recommendations shipped to production.
CHALLENGE
After Stroili's site-wide redesign launched, analytics told a clear story: the PDP was underperforming.
- Exit rate increased from 38.6% → 40.2%
- Add-to-cart rate dropped from 0.56% → 0.45%
- Page load time grew by 12.4% (1.11s → 1.25s)
- Rage clicks appeared on non-interactive elements — banners, static product attributes, payment icons
The PDP is critical not just for online conversion. Only ~5% of Stroili's users purchase online, but the product page is where most customers research before buying in-store. A confusing PDP doesn't just lose digital sales — it undermines trust for the entire purchase journey
This wasn't a blank-canvas redesign. I was working within real organizational limits:
- High-traffic page — every change needed data justification
- Yearly tech roadmap already planned — no major backend changes possible
- Multi-brand platform — solutions had to follow shared best practices
- Legal and business requirements dictated certain content on the page
PROCESS
Phase 1: Data Audit — Finding what broke
Using Contentsquare zoning analysis, journey mapping, and behavioral data, It is identified 11 specific usability issues on the post-redesign PDP. Each finding was backed by quantitative evidence and mapped to a UX heuristic (Bastien & Scapin framework).
The initial brief was about conversion metrics. But the data pointed to a deeper issue. I reframed the problem:
"How might we make the PDP a clear, reassuring, and frictionless decision space — for both online buyers and in-store researchers?"
This reframe shifted the design direction from "fix the add-to-cart button" to rethinking the entire information hierarchy — what users need to see, in what order, to feel confident enough to act.
Phase 3: Redesign
I designed an alternative PDP with two variants (for A/B comparison) and a long-term vision version. The approach: start from essentials (product, price, CTA), then progressively layer supporting information without overwhelming the user.
Key design decisions:
- Sticky "Add to Cart" — always visible, no dead zones
- Clear separation between interactive and static content — product attributes restyled as plain text, removing false affordances
- Recommendations moved up — "Pensati per te" placed above technical specifications
- Reassurance elements elevated — delivery, returns, and warranty moved above the fold on desktop with distinct visual grouping
- Reduced visual noise — misleading banners replaced with text labels, redundant tags consolidated
- Two CTA variants tested — "Abbina con" vs "Scopri di più" on the product image, to test discoverability of the pairing feature
- Color/material selector redesigned — visual swatches for metal types, clearer labeling
Every decision balanced user needs against business constraints — no dark patterns, no radical departures from the multi-brand design system.
Phase 4: User Testing — Validating with 16 participants
I co-designed a structured test protocol and helped run remote testing sessions with 16 participants (60% women, 40% men, ages 35–55, Italian market, online jewelry shoppers, non-Stroili customers).
Metrics tracked: task success rates, time-to-find, friction moments, confidence signals, moderator help dependency.
Findings — What the Test Revealed
Validated
Color/material selection works well. Users found it "simple," "clear," and "easy." Seeing all available options was consistently valued — two users called it the best part of the page. One friction point: the label "colore" confused users who were thinking about metal type, not color.
Loyalty program placement is logical. The new location near the price makes sense to users. But the visual treatment needs work — font too small, contrast too low, no clear label. Users also expected to see points, not euros.
Needs iteration
Product information placement matters more than expected. Users want core details (material, stone type, composition) near the product image and price — not buried below. When users see a new visual section (photos, recommendations), they mentally close the product and assume everything below is about other products. Three participants explicitly asked not to hide stone and material info.
The "Scopri di più" CTA on the product image doesn't work. Users don't notice it. They expect important buttons near the price, not overlaid on photos. The label "Scopri di più" was also used for different purposes across the page, creating confusion.
Delivery info needs dual placement. Users find it easily by scrolling, but some expect it in the footer or at checkout. Four users specifically valued free delivery thresholds and return policy info from the current design — information the new design removed.
Not validated
"Abbina con" (product pairing) creates confusion with "Complete the look." Users couldn't distinguish between the two sections. The pairing CTA on the product photo was missed by most participants. Some who found it were excited about the concept, but expected bundle pricing. The recommendation: don't ship this section as-is — optimize it as a dedicated future project.
IMPACT
What shipped
Several recommendations from the audit and redesign were implemented in production:
- Sticky "Add to Cart" button — eliminating the dead zone that blocked purchases
- Color/material selector improvements — clearer visual design
- Product information placement — key details moved higher in the hierarchy
- Loyalty program redesign — planned for launch alongside the new loyalty program
What I delivered
- A data-backed audit identifying 11 usability issues with evidence and competitive benchmarks
- An alternative PDP design (mobile + desktop) with interactive Figma prototypes
- A structured user testing protocol for 20 participants
- Validated findings with clear design recommendations per feature area
- Alignment across PM, brand stakeholders, and the centralized tech team on a long-term PDP vision
Organizational impact
- Created a shared understanding between design, product, and business teams about what "PDP improvement" actually means
- Demonstrated that data-informed design decisions build stakeholder trust faster than opinion-based arguments
- Established a reusable testing protocol for future page evaluations
*Post-launch metrics are tracked by the team. At the time of my departure, the sticky CTA and revised information hierarchy were in production; the loyalty program redesign is planned for the program launch.
THIS PROJECT TAUGHT ME
On constraints and pragmatism. This project taught me that gradual, evidence-based implementation is more effective than proposing radical change in a large organization. The yearly tech roadmap, multi-brand requirements, and legal constraints weren't blockers — they were the design problem itself.
On reframing. Shifting from "fix conversion" to "make this a better decision space" opened up solutions that addressed both online and offline user needs. The 5% online purchase rate isn't a weakness — it means the PDP's real job is building confidence, not just closing sales.
On validation. The user testing results challenged some of my assumptions. The "Abbina con" feature — which I designed and was excited about — didn't test well. Being willing to recommend against shipping your own work is part of the job.