Marketplace channel redesign
07 / 08Wedding Planning Channel Redesign
Helping engaged couples browse real wedding cases and assess a planner before making contact
At a glance
ChallengeEngaged couples used wedding cases for inspiration, but did not always trust that planners had delivered the work shown.
My contributionI redesigned the channel structure, entry cards, filters, case list, certification treatment, case details, and visual experience across the browse path.
EvidenceThe project team recorded a 16% higher click rate for entry cards with copy. Its sample size and test window are not preserved.
Context & research
Couples browsed cases for inspiration, but needed proof
The wedding planning project team identified a trust problem among engaged couples looking for planners in the Hunliji App. In the archived research, every participant looked at cases when choosing a planner, while repeatedly questioning whether the work shown was real.
The research was conducted by the project team. Its original sample details are no longer available, so I use it as the source of the design problem rather than a population-level claim.
The central design tension was to make authenticity visible without interrupting case browsing. Couples still needed to move quickly through visual inspiration before deciding which planner deserved closer attention.
Entry & information priority
Make the main choices clear at the top
I separated three common intents: browse popular planners, work within a smaller budget, or request a custom quote. Color, short copy, and simple 3D illustrations made the choices easier to scan.
I explored four visual options. The project team’s archived data recorded a 16% higher click rate for cards that combined an illustration with copy than for the graphic-only option. The original sample size and test period are missing, so this remains directional evidence.
Browse & Trust
Make authenticity visible without slowing down browsing
I made cases the default browse content and simplified the filters around what couples compared. Cases verified by the platform received a visible certification label in the waterfall list, instead of making users wait until the detail page to discover it.
The same proof continued into case details. Reference price, real venue photos, certification, and a reporting path gave couples more context before they contacted a planner.
Post-launch validation
The product team reviewed the released experience
The relevant product team validated the experience after launch and provided the archived entry-card result.
The record does not preserve the sample size, test window, consultation conversion, or long-term usage, so I keep the outcome claim limited to the recorded click-rate comparison.
Outcome & Evidence Boundary
A clearer way to compare real work
The redesign aligned the channel, case list, and case detail around one question: can this planner deliver a wedding like the one shown?
Platform-reviewed cases made authenticity visible where couples browsed and compared, while the visual flow remained focused on inspiration.
The archive confirms the design changes and one directional click-rate comparison. It does not preserve consultation conversion or long-term usage data, so I do not claim those outcomes.
Next Project