Request & Compare Quotations
The Request For Quote feature provides an robust way to request, gather, compare, and ultimately choose a supplier for FF&E and OS&E items.
Role
Product Designer
Type
SaaS, B2B
Year
2022-2023
Request & Compare Quotations
The Request For Quote feature provides an robust way to request, gather, compare, and ultimately choose a supplier for FF&E and OS&E items.
Role
Product Designer
Type
SaaS, B2B
Year
2022-2023
Request & Compare Quotations
The Request For Quote feature provides an robust way to request, gather, compare, and ultimately choose a supplier for FF&E and OS&E items.
Role
Product Designer
Type
SaaS, B2B
Year
2022-2023
Overview
The Background
Fohlio Inc. is a leading provider of digital solutions that streamline project management and product specifications for architects, interior designers, and construction professionals.
The Request For Quotations(RFQ) feature is crucial to Fohlio and its customers because it completes the procurement workflow comprehensively, a unique offering not matched by competitors who only provide segmented procurement solutions. By integrating a seamless RFQ process, Fohlio not only enhances cost management and supplier relationships but also addresses a significant pain point for core users who face manual and tedious RFQ processes in their current systems. This comprehensive approach positions Fohlio to attract major accounts, setting it apart in the market and driving greater user satisfaction and success.
The Solution
We offer a streamlined RFQ process that enables users to request, receive, and compare quotations efficiently within a single platform. Our smart comparison feature further enhances this by allowing users to evaluate multiple supplier options side by side, optimizing their budget allocation and ensuring the most cost-effective choices for their projects.
The Value Proposition
This comprehensive RFQ solution significantly improves efficiency, leading to higher user satisfaction and retention with Fohlio. It also positions us to attract new clients and secure major accounts by addressing common pain points in procurement, while setting us apart from competitors who provide only fragmented procurement solutions. This integrated approach not only strengthens our market position but also drives competitive advantage by offering a superior, all-in-one procurement experience.
Impact
1.75x
1.75x
USER ENGAGEMENT
Increased user engagement after the first month of the release.
2x
2x
SUCCESS RATE
Success rates improved thanks to the clearer navigation and intuitive design.
3x
3x
Efficiency
Reduction in the amount of time users spend on the quote comparison.
Problem
Slow Quote Acquisition
The process of obtaining quotes is often slow and cumbersome due to the manual input of quotes and the need for continuous back-and-forth communication for updates. Users must manually enter each quote into the system, which is time-consuming and prone to errors. Additionally, requesting updates from suppliers and waiting for responses further delays the procurement process, creating inefficiencies and extending project timelines.
Challenges in Efficient Supplier Quote Comparison
Users faced the significant challenge of manually comparing quotes side by side to identify the best supplier, a task that consumed considerable time and effort. This manual comparison process negated the efficiency gains intended by the RFQ feature, ultimately impacting the overall effectiveness of the procurement workflow.
Target User Profile
🧑💻 Project Manager / Procurement Manager
Project managers and procurement managers are responsible for managing the procurement process within their organizations. These professionals handle tasks such as requesting and comparing quotations, selecting suppliers, and ensuring that procurement activities align with project budgets and timelines.
Slow Quote Acquisition
The process of obtaining quotes is often slow and cumbersome due to the manual input of quotes and the need for continuous back-and-forth communication for updates. Users must manually enter each quote into the system, which is time-consuming and prone to errors. Additionally, requesting updates from suppliers and waiting for responses further delays the procurement process, creating inefficiencies and extending project timelines.
Challenges in Efficient Supplier Quote Comparison
Users faced the significant challenge of manually comparing quotes side by side to identify the best supplier, a task that consumed considerable time and effort. This manual comparison process negated the efficiency gains intended by the RFQ feature, ultimately impacting the overall effectiveness of the procurement workflow.
Target User Profile
🧑💻 Project Manager / Procurement Manager
Project managers and procurement managers are responsible for managing the procurement process within their organizations. These professionals handle tasks such as requesting and comparing quotations, selecting suppliers, and ensuring that procurement activities align with project budgets and timelines.
Slow Quote Acquisition
The process of obtaining quotes is often slow and cumbersome due to the manual input of quotes and the need for continuous back-and-forth communication for updates. Users must manually enter each quote into the system, which is time-consuming and prone to errors. Additionally, requesting updates from suppliers and waiting for responses further delays the procurement process, creating inefficiencies and extending project timelines.
Challenges in Efficient Supplier Quote Comparison
Users faced the significant challenge of manually comparing quotes side by side to identify the best supplier, a task that consumed considerable time and effort. This manual comparison process negated the efficiency gains intended by the RFQ feature, ultimately impacting the overall effectiveness of the procurement workflow.
Target User Profile
🧑💻 Project Manager / Procurement Manager
Project managers and procurement managers are responsible for managing the procurement process within their organizations. These professionals handle tasks such as requesting and comparing quotations, selecting suppliers, and ensuring that procurement activities align with project budgets and timelines.
Research
User Flow Analysis
The research began with a comprehensive analysis of the user flow. Through a combination of user interviews, surveys, and usability tests involving both customer-facing teams and end-users, we aimed to uncover the critical "Jobs To Be Done" (JBTD) at each step of the procurement workflow. This approach provided a deep understanding of the user perspective and identified significant pain points in their journey.
Key JBTDs
Request & Receive Quotations
Users currently spend a considerable amount of time and effort manually requesting and collecting quotations from various suppliers.
Value Engineering
Users often seek supplier alternatives, either proactively provided or upon request, to ensure they are getting the best value for their money.
Identify the Lowest Offer
Users need to manually compare quotes to identify the most cost-effective supplier offer, a process that is both time-consuming and prone to errors.
Comparison Table Presentation
Users need to present a clear and comprehensive comparison table to end clients, which requires significant manual effort to compile and maintain.
These insights and JBTDs were crucial in understanding the existing conditions and challenges, thereby informing the design and development of enhancements to the Request For Quote feature.
To build upon existing knowledge, we conducted an in-depth study of the current workflow of our Ideal Customer Profile (ICP). This involved pinpointing specific pain points and areas for improvement within their procurement process.
Major Pain Points
Users struggled with the laborious task of consolidating multiple quotes into a single, easily comparable table. This manual upkeep was a significant source of inefficiency and frustration.
The manual input of quotes and continuous back-and-forth communication for updates slowed down the quote acquisition process.
Difficulty in maintaining an updated and accurate quote comparison table, which often led to errors and misinformed decisions.
Lack of integration with other systems posed substantial challenges, preventing users from smoothly progressing to subsequent steps after making procurement decisions.
Users faced obstacles in gathering and organizing supplier quotations in a timely manner, which affected the overall procurement timeline and project schedules.
This research phase was instrumental in uncovering the specific pain points and challenges faced by users within the existing workflow, providing valuable insights to inform the development of solutions tailored to their needs.
User Flow Analysis
The research began with a comprehensive analysis of the user flow. Through a combination of user interviews, surveys, and usability tests involving both customer-facing teams and end-users, we aimed to uncover the critical "Jobs To Be Done" (JBTD) at each step of the procurement workflow. This approach provided a deep understanding of the user perspective and identified significant pain points in their journey.
Key JBTDs
Request & Receive Quotations
Users currently spend a considerable amount of time and effort manually requesting and collecting quotations from various suppliers.
Value Engineering
Users often seek supplier alternatives, either proactively provided or upon request, to ensure they are getting the best value for their money.
Identify the Lowest Offer
Users need to manually compare quotes to identify the most cost-effective supplier offer, a process that is both time-consuming and prone to errors.
Comparison Table Presentation
Users need to present a clear and comprehensive comparison table to end clients, which requires significant manual effort to compile and maintain.
These insights and JBTDs were crucial in understanding the existing conditions and challenges, thereby informing the design and development of enhancements to the Request For Quote feature.
To build upon existing knowledge, we conducted an in-depth study of the current workflow of our Ideal Customer Profile (ICP). This involved pinpointing specific pain points and areas for improvement within their procurement process.
Major Pain Points
Users struggled with the laborious task of consolidating multiple quotes into a single, easily comparable table. This manual upkeep was a significant source of inefficiency and frustration.
The manual input of quotes and continuous back-and-forth communication for updates slowed down the quote acquisition process.
Difficulty in maintaining an updated and accurate quote comparison table, which often led to errors and misinformed decisions.
Lack of integration with other systems posed substantial challenges, preventing users from smoothly progressing to subsequent steps after making procurement decisions.
Users faced obstacles in gathering and organizing supplier quotations in a timely manner, which affected the overall procurement timeline and project schedules.
This research phase was instrumental in uncovering the specific pain points and challenges faced by users within the existing workflow, providing valuable insights to inform the development of solutions tailored to their needs.
User Flow Analysis
The research began with a comprehensive analysis of the user flow. Through a combination of user interviews, surveys, and usability tests involving both customer-facing teams and end-users, we aimed to uncover the critical "Jobs To Be Done" (JBTD) at each step of the procurement workflow. This approach provided a deep understanding of the user perspective and identified significant pain points in their journey.
Key JBTDs
Request & Receive Quotations
Users currently spend a considerable amount of time and effort manually requesting and collecting quotations from various suppliers.
Value Engineering
Users often seek supplier alternatives, either proactively provided or upon request, to ensure they are getting the best value for their money.
Identify the Lowest Offer
Users need to manually compare quotes to identify the most cost-effective supplier offer, a process that is both time-consuming and prone to errors.
Comparison Table Presentation
Users need to present a clear and comprehensive comparison table to end clients, which requires significant manual effort to compile and maintain.
These insights and JBTDs were crucial in understanding the existing conditions and challenges, thereby informing the design and development of enhancements to the Request For Quote feature.
To build upon existing knowledge, we conducted an in-depth study of the current workflow of our Ideal Customer Profile (ICP). This involved pinpointing specific pain points and areas for improvement within their procurement process.
Major Pain Points
Users struggled with the laborious task of consolidating multiple quotes into a single, easily comparable table. This manual upkeep was a significant source of inefficiency and frustration.
The manual input of quotes and continuous back-and-forth communication for updates slowed down the quote acquisition process.
Difficulty in maintaining an updated and accurate quote comparison table, which often led to errors and misinformed decisions.
Lack of integration with other systems posed substantial challenges, preventing users from smoothly progressing to subsequent steps after making procurement decisions.
Users faced obstacles in gathering and organizing supplier quotations in a timely manner, which affected the overall procurement timeline and project schedules.
This research phase was instrumental in uncovering the specific pain points and challenges faced by users within the existing workflow, providing valuable insights to inform the development of solutions tailored to their needs.
Design Goals
👨🔧 Effortless Workflow Streamlining
Seamlessly optimize the request for quote process within the RFQ workflow to reduce user effort and enhance efficiency. This includes automating repetitive tasks, minimizing manual input, and ensuring a smooth flow from quote request to receipt.
💻 Comparison Facilitation
Provide an intuitive decision-making assistant that empowers users to identify and select the most suitable supplier easily. This feature will facilitate the comparison of multiple quotes, highlighting key differences and enabling informed choices quickly and accurately.
Approach
Main Interface
To streamline the process of requesting and receiving quotes, I began by mapping out the minimum viable product (MVP) flows. These flows were designed to ensure users could effortlessly request quotes from suppliers and receive responses.
After analyzed the required data for a quote, I created two options for the main interface.
I then created two options for the main interface layout and tested them with users to determine the most effective design. Option B emerged as the better choice due to its user-friendly structure. However, feedback indicated that the information section occupied too much screen space, hindering usability.
To address this, I implemented a collapsible design for the information section, optimizing the interface for both functionality and space efficiency.
Request For Quote
Value Engineering (Request Alternatives)
Recognizing the importance of value engineering, I integrated a flow that allows users to request alternative options from suppliers directly within the main RFQ process.
This feature enables users to explore different supplier options and receive alternative proposals. Once received, these alternative options are nested with the original items, providing a clear and organized view of all potential choices. This addition not only enhances decision-making but also ensures users can maximize value within their procurement processes.
Request Updates
To further support users, I developed a feature that facilitates the request for updates from suppliers.
This step ensures that users can easily follow up on their RFQ requests, receive timely updates, and maintain clear communication with suppliers. By integrating this capability, the RFQ process becomes more dynamic and responsive to the needs of the users.
Comparison
The comparison phase is critical to the RFQ process, as it enables users to evaluate and select the best supplier based on the received quotes.
After reviewing the JBTDs and design goals, I created two layout options for the comparison interface. Option 1 provided versatility in displaying product specifications, especially useful when multiple alternatives were present. Option 2 allowed for more items to be shown on the table at once, but required users to click on each item for detailed information. Based on my assumption that efficiently comparing key information was the priority, and validated through user interviews, I concluded that Option 2 was the preferred direction. After discussing these findings with stakeholders, we decided to proceed with Option 2, ensuring that the comparison feature meets user needs effectively and enhances the overall RFQ workflow.
This comprehensive design process, from mapping MVP flows to iterating on user feedback, demonstrates our commitment to creating a seamless and efficient RFQ feature. By addressing user pain points and aligning with business objectives, we developed a solution that significantly improves the procurement experience for Fohlio's users.
Main Interface
To streamline the process of requesting and receiving quotes, I began by mapping out the minimum viable product (MVP) flows. These flows were designed to ensure users could effortlessly request quotes from suppliers and receive responses.
After analyzed the required data for a quote, I created two options for the main interface.
I then created two options for the main interface layout and tested them with users to determine the most effective design. Option B emerged as the better choice due to its user-friendly structure. However, feedback indicated that the information section occupied too much screen space, hindering usability.
To address this, I implemented a collapsible design for the information section, optimizing the interface for both functionality and space efficiency.
Request For Quote
Value Engineering (Request Alternatives)
Recognizing the importance of value engineering, I integrated a flow that allows users to request alternative options from suppliers directly within the main RFQ process.
This feature enables users to explore different supplier options and receive alternative proposals. Once received, these alternative options are nested with the original items, providing a clear and organized view of all potential choices. This addition not only enhances decision-making but also ensures users can maximize value within their procurement processes.
Request Updates
To further support users, I developed a feature that facilitates the request for updates from suppliers.
This step ensures that users can easily follow up on their RFQ requests, receive timely updates, and maintain clear communication with suppliers. By integrating this capability, the RFQ process becomes more dynamic and responsive to the needs of the users.
Comparison
The comparison phase is critical to the RFQ process, as it enables users to evaluate and select the best supplier based on the received quotes.
After reviewing the JBTDs and design goals, I created two layout options for the comparison interface. Option 1 provided versatility in displaying product specifications, especially useful when multiple alternatives were present. Option 2 allowed for more items to be shown on the table at once, but required users to click on each item for detailed information. Based on my assumption that efficiently comparing key information was the priority, and validated through user interviews, I concluded that Option 2 was the preferred direction. After discussing these findings with stakeholders, we decided to proceed with Option 2, ensuring that the comparison feature meets user needs effectively and enhances the overall RFQ workflow.
This comprehensive design process, from mapping MVP flows to iterating on user feedback, demonstrates our commitment to creating a seamless and efficient RFQ feature. By addressing user pain points and aligning with business objectives, we developed a solution that significantly improves the procurement experience for Fohlio's users.
Main Interface
To streamline the process of requesting and receiving quotes, I began by mapping out the minimum viable product (MVP) flows. These flows were designed to ensure users could effortlessly request quotes from suppliers and receive responses.
After analyzed the required data for a quote, I created two options for the main interface.
I then created two options for the main interface layout and tested them with users to determine the most effective design. Option B emerged as the better choice due to its user-friendly structure. However, feedback indicated that the information section occupied too much screen space, hindering usability.
To address this, I implemented a collapsible design for the information section, optimizing the interface for both functionality and space efficiency.
Request For Quote
Value Engineering (Request Alternatives)
Recognizing the importance of value engineering, I integrated a flow that allows users to request alternative options from suppliers directly within the main RFQ process.
This feature enables users to explore different supplier options and receive alternative proposals. Once received, these alternative options are nested with the original items, providing a clear and organized view of all potential choices. This addition not only enhances decision-making but also ensures users can maximize value within their procurement processes.
Request Updates
To further support users, I developed a feature that facilitates the request for updates from suppliers.
This step ensures that users can easily follow up on their RFQ requests, receive timely updates, and maintain clear communication with suppliers. By integrating this capability, the RFQ process becomes more dynamic and responsive to the needs of the users.
Comparison
The comparison phase is critical to the RFQ process, as it enables users to evaluate and select the best supplier based on the received quotes.
After reviewing the JBTDs and design goals, I created two layout options for the comparison interface. Option 1 provided versatility in displaying product specifications, especially useful when multiple alternatives were present. Option 2 allowed for more items to be shown on the table at once, but required users to click on each item for detailed information. Based on my assumption that efficiently comparing key information was the priority, and validated through user interviews, I concluded that Option 2 was the preferred direction. After discussing these findings with stakeholders, we decided to proceed with Option 2, ensuring that the comparison feature meets user needs effectively and enhances the overall RFQ workflow.
This comprehensive design process, from mapping MVP flows to iterating on user feedback, demonstrates our commitment to creating a seamless and efficient RFQ feature. By addressing user pain points and aligning with business objectives, we developed a solution that significantly improves the procurement experience for Fohlio's users.
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Thank you for stopping by
·
Open to
Open to
Open to
work
work
work
Let's Chat!