IGP is an Indian gifting platform where people buy cakes, flowers, and personalized gifts for birthdays, anniversaries, and celebrations. Aside from personal occasions, a large chunk of orders comes from seasonal events like Rakshabandhan, where users buy rakhis and gift hampers.
The company wanted to sell more personalized gifts, but our existing flow wasn't built to handle complex items or high volume smoothly. The original personalization backend was slow, expensive to run, and very rigid on the frontend. Because the frontend was tightly bound to this legacy system, users had to click "Proceed" after entering every single text field or photo. If someone was buying an item with four custom fields, a multi-product basket, or multiple personalized gifts, they had to go through a long, repetitive sequence of screens.
We decided to upgrade the backend to handle personalization better. While the product manager worked on the backend and internal panel, I was tasked with updating the frontend user experience.
OLD PERSONALIZATION FLOW
Before jumping into designs, I spent time understanding how the new backend worked and what technical limitations I needed to design around. The main constraint was that we couldn’t rebuild everything from scratch or migrate all products overnight. While the new backend was live, almost all existing products on the site still ran on the legacy backend. The catalogue team was updating products manually, but with new items added daily, both backends were going to coexist for a while.
I had to design a new UI that felt unified to the user across the site, even though the underlying backend differed depending on the product. To account for all variations, we mapped out eight product categories across the platform:
To decide where to focus our effort, we first pulled data on how the existing flow was performing:
The data made one thing clear: single-input products were already fairly simple, so updating their UI wouldn't change conversion or completion time much. The real bottleneck was on products with multiple inputs and multiple personalizations, where users were forced through tedious multi-step screens.
So, we focused our design efforts on making multi-input and multi-personalization products faster and easier to complete. We also looked at how competitor sites and personalization-focused platforms handled complex inputs before drafting our UI variations.
COMPETATIVE RESEARCH
NEW PERSONALIZATION FLOW
We replaced the rigid multi-step flow with a cleaner, progressive interface. Here are the main changes:
INPUTS IN OLD VS NEW
MULTIPLE INPUTS IN OLD VS FLOW
IMAGE UPLOAD FUNCTIONALITY IN OLD VS NEW FLOW
PROGRESS INDICATORS IN OLD VS NEW FLOW
MULTIPLE PERSONALIZATION IN OLD VS FLOW
We ran an A/B test comparing the legacy flow (Default) with the updated flow (Variant).
| Segment | Default | Variant | Δ (pp) | Lift |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall: All personalization types | 51.14% | 52.47% | +1.33 | +2.6% |
| Overall: Name | 65.01% | 67.58% | +2.57 | +4.0% |
| Overall: Image | 43.11% | 43.47% | +0.36 | +0.8% |
| Types 4 & 6 (New products): Overall | 51.16% | 54.53% | +3.37 | +6.6% |
| Types 4 & 6: Text | 66.11% | 70.73% | +4.62 | +7.0% |
| Types 4 & 6: Image | 45.65% | 47.45% | +1.80 | +3.9% |
| Types 4 & 6: Combined | 35.13% | 41.02% | +5.89 | +16.8% |
| Segment | Default | Variant | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall: All personalization types | 1.4m | 1.2m | −14% |
| Overall: Name | 36s | 30s | −17% |
| Overall: Image | 3.5m | 3.4m | −3% |
| Overall: Combined | 5.7m | 5.0m | −12% |
| Types 4 & 6: Overall | 1.8m | 1.6m | −11% |
| Types 4 & 6: Text | 33s | 27s | −18% |
| Types 4 & 6: Image | 3.5m | 3.6m | +3% |
| Types 4 & 6: Combined | 4.0m | 3.5m | −12% |
| Segment | Default | Variant | Δ (pp) | Lift |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall: All personalization types | 64.06% | 69.65% | +5.59 | +8.7% |
| Overall: Image | 45.19% | 46.54% | +1.35 | +3.0% |
| Overall: Text | 76.10% | 82.95% | +6.85 | +9.0% |
| Overall: Combined | 25.00% | 35.90% | +10.90 | +43.6% |
| Types 4 & 6: Combined | 25.00% | 50.00% | +25.00 | +100% |
| Types 4 & 6: Image | 43.64% | 53.33% | +9.69 | +22.2% |
| Types 4 & 6: Text | 75.81% | 86.59% | +10.78 | +14.2% |
| Segment | Default | Variant | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall: All personalization types | 46s | 38s | −17% |
| Overall: Image | 4.6m | 3.2m | −30% |
| Overall: Text | 31s | 29s | −6% |
| Overall: Combined | 1.7m | 5.1m | +200% |
| Types 4 & 6: Overall | 49s | 38s | −22% |
| Types 4 & 6: Image | 4.3m | 3.0m | −30% |
| Types 4 & 6: Text | 31s | 28s | −10% |
| Types 4 & 6: Combined | 1.7m | 3.0m | +76% |