Align
Define outcome and constraints
The group agreed a 12-month goal, target user and business metrics, scope and constraints before discussing solutions.
Why it mattered: every later prioritisation could be evaluated against the same outcome.
Paysafe · Skrill · Digital wallets · 2024
Scaling withdrawals: how Design thinking sparked 50% QoQ volume growth.
Finding the real problem behind a 50% funnel drop-off on a single step. The data showed where users abandoned a fast-growing money-out journey, but not why. I led discovery, alignment, ideation, product design and testing. I exposed a discoverability problem before the step with the 50% drop-off and redesigned the journey within legal and technical constraints.
Role
Sole product designer in a cross-functional squad, owning workshop design and facilitation, research, product strategy and design end to end.
Product and scope
Skrill digital wallet,
Withdraw to crypto wallet for iOS, Android and web across EEA, UK and LATAM markets.
Withdraw to crypto wallet for iOS, Android and web across EEA, UK and LATAM markets.
Challenge
Find why users left and improve the journey without assuming the measured funnel step was the only cause.
My contribution
Stakeholder design-thinking workshops, quantitative data analysis, usability testing and moderated interviews, journey map and personas, problem framing, IA, interaction and design-system component design, delivery scoping with Engineering.
Impact
10K → 15K withdrawals / month,
+50% relative decrease in drop-off on the “Amount step”,
4.7/5 discoverability of the new entry point.
+50% relative decrease in drop-off on the “Amount step”,
4.7/5 discoverability of the new entry point.
01 · The problem
Product saw a drop-off. The team did not yet know why.
Withdraw to crypto wallet lets a user spend fiat in Skrill to buy crypto and send it directly to an external wallet in one transaction. It was one of the fastest-growing money-out features, yet more than half of users left at one step and support contacts persisted.
The immediate temptation was to redesign the step highlighted in Amplitude. That would have treated the visible symptom as the cause.
I proposed a structured discovery and alignment cycle before interface work to test whether the primary barrier sat inside the measured funnel - or before users entered it.
02 · Discovery
Five sources, chosen so no single one could carry the argument
I worked with Product, Analytics and Support to collect the evidence in one shared space, write hypotheses for the drop-off and name how each could be checked.
BI reports
Who used the feature, from which markets and platforms, at what volume, and how withdrawal and trading behaviour changed over time.
Funnel analytics
Where users left, including the sharp loss between the first and second step and differences across app and web.
Support contacts
Recurring questions about limits, minimums, network information and expected arrival time.
Current-state testing
Moderated user interviews and usability testing to reveal why users struggled, not merely where analytics recorded abandonment.
Competitor review
Entry, naming and flow patterns across exchanges, digital wallets and on-ramp products.
Snapshot of the Miro research board Research evidence
The hypothesis board, and how each one would be tested 5 hypothesis on the drop-off
Traders expect to withdraw crypto they already hold
They drop when they see the feature is not what they imagined. Test: BI on the share of withdrawal users who are traders, plus usability testing.
Users have no fiat balance available
They drop because there is nothing to withdraw. Test: not answerable — tracking changes required first. Named as a gap rather than assumed away.
Users are just exploring
The drop is browsing, not failure. Test: behavioural analysis in BI.
On app, users cannot switch to a secondary balance
Test: ask in interviews, plus compare secondary-balance usage on app versus web — a higher share on web would show the app is harder.
Entering a crypto address is difficult
Test: hands-on task on a test account, watching participants do it rather than asking them about it.
User interview script Research goals and topics
03 · Finding that changed the brief
The largest problem began before the measured funnel.
I ran ten moderated sessions on mobile and ten on web. The mobile group included five Skrill users and five non-users across the UK, Brazil, Italy, Portugal and Argentina.
5 / 10
completed a mobile withdrawal. Half could not find the feature at all.
7 / 10
began in Crypto, usually through Buy crypto and then More. Three began from Exchange. Transfer - the live location - was a last resort.
Mental-model gap
Users expected to buy then send crypto, or send an existing crypto balance. Skrill combined fiat purchase and external transfer in one action.
The research card and usability-testing scenario Current-state testing
Key insight
Users abandoned the journey partly because they could not find or predict it - not only because the amount step was difficult.
That evidence expanded the scope from optimising one screen to improving entry, comprehension and the critical information shown before commitment.
The Miro journey map Journey mapping
The persona boards 3 personas
04 · Strategy and key decisions
Research changed what the team chose to solve.
I facilitated time-boxed workshop sessions following the design thinking methodology with Product, stakeholders and Engineering. Silent individual writing reduced anchoring; voting helped the group converge on the problems with the strongest user and business value.
Prioritise
Reduce 16 problems to six
Journey mapping produced 16 distinct problems. We ranked them by user and business value, then by impact and implementation effort.
Trade-off: lower-value friction remained visible, but did not consume the release.
Ideate
Ideate against named problems
Six selected problems became How Might We prompts, followed by timeboxed ideation, voting and competitor lightning demos.
Result: solution work stayed traceable to the evidence rather than becoming an open-ended redesign.
05 · Ideation and Design
Legal restrictions removed the clearest naming options.
I designed four journey variants for app and web and reviewed them with Design, Product, Engineering, Legal and partner networks.
Two variants relied on clearer for the users naming for the new entry point, but constraints ruled out “Buy” and “Send” labels. The feature had to retain its “Withdraw to crypto wallet” naming.
I stopped relying on the label alone. A descriptive card at the top of the crypto dashboard explained the feature where crypto-oriented users already looked. The route under Transfer remained for established behaviour.
Rejected · legal & partner networks
Buy entry point
Concept
The “Buy” button leads the user to either buy crypto and store it on Skrill or send it to an external crypto address.
Rationale
In the usability test of the initial flow, the majority of users searched for an option under “Buy” on the Crypto tab.
Voting
Product: 4 votes · Design: 2 votes
Constraints
Partner Networks and Legal disapproved the use of “Buy” or “Send.”
Usability testing
Testing was paused to save effort after the feature failed partner-network and legal approval.
Approved3.5 / 5 ease of finding
More-menu entry point
Concept
The “More” button opens a list of secondary actions, with withdrawal as one of them.
Rationale
In the usability test of the initial flow, the majority of users searched for the option under “Buy” or “More” on the Crypto tab.
Voting
Product: 1 regular vote and 1 decider vote · Design: 4 votes
Constraints
No constraints from Partner Networks or Legal.
Usability testing
Ease of finding the entry point: 3.5/5. One out of five users who searched on the Crypto tab completed the withdrawal through “More.”
Rejected · legal & partner networks
Send entry point
Concept
The “Send” button leads the user to either send crypto to an external crypto address or send crypto to another Skrill user.
Rationale
Research across exchanges, digital wallets and on-ramps revealed that “Send” and “Withdraw” are the most common labels for similar functionality.
Voting
Product: 3 votes · Design: 0 votes
Constraints
Partner Networks and Legal disapproved the use of “Buy” or “Send.”
Usability testing
Testing was paused to save effort after the feature failed partner-network and legal approval.
Approved4 / 5 ease of finding
Withdraw button
Concept
A dedicated “Withdraw” button on the Crypto tab leads the user to the functionality.
Rationale
Research across exchanges, digital wallets and on-ramps revealed that “Send” and “Withdraw” are the most common labels for similar functionality.
Voting
Product: 1 decider vote · Design: 0 votes
Constraints
No constraints from Partner Networks or Legal.
Usability testing
Ease of finding the entry point: 4/5. Two out of five users who searched on the Crypto tab completed the withdrawal through the “Withdraw” button.
Approved4.7 / 5 ease of finding
Descriptive Withdraw to crypto wallet card
Concept
A dedicated “Withdraw to crypto wallet” card on the Crypto tab leads the user to the functionality, supporting discoverability and understandability.
Rationale
Research showed that “Send” and “Withdraw” are common labels for similar functionality. User testing showed that users understood the feature’s purpose much better when the entry point included an additional descriptive label.
Voting · second design review
Product: 4 votes · Design: 6 votes
Constraints
No constraints from Partner Networks or Legal.
Usability testing
Ease of finding the entry point: 4.7/5. Two out of five users who searched on the Crypto tab completed the withdrawal through the new entry point.
The design review 4 journey variants
The new entry point that supported 50% QoQ volume increase
After the legal review, I revisited the approved flows because they would have missed the user and business goals. I designed a new entry point that makes the feature visible exactly where users searched for it - on the crypto dashboard and explains its mechanics - supporting the user need for clarity on what is the functionality and how it works.
The web entry-point states First-time and returning users
06 · Validation and product redesign
The descriptive dashboard card was easiest to find.
Ten participants evaluated each proposed journey across app and web. Testing measured entry-point discoverability, overall ease and end-to-end clarity.
4.7 / 5
Dashboard card. The highest ease-of-finding score among tested entry points.
4.0 / 5
Dashboard button. Easier to find than the menu treatment, but less effective than the descriptive card.
3.5 / 5
More-menu card. The lowest score, confirming that a hidden entry was insufficient.
The user-response matrix Usability-test responses
Why two final entry points remained: participants did not behave uniformly. Many still went directly to Transfer, so the final design supported both the established route and the new crypto-dashboard route.
Critical flow decision
The step where users dropped off
This details step triggered the initiative. The old screen asked for the cryptocurrency, network, wallet address and amount at once, then showed contradictory limits beside a disabled Continue button. The redesign separates Spend and Receive, shows the balance, balance segregation, accurate limits, live exchange rate and total fees upfront, and moves the wallet address to its own step.
BeforeThe live journey
AfterThe redesign
Drag the handle or use the arrow keys to compare
Fees before commitment
Fees were absent from the Enter amount screen and added on top of the spend amount. Because the displayed limits ignored them, users could not tell whether their balance covered the amount plus fees. They also could not see the exchange rate or how much crypto would reach their wallet. The redesign brought those details forward and kept a full fee breakdown available on demand.
Limits
One relevant limit
The interface shows either minimum or maximum according to state, avoiding contradictory simultaneous messages.
Design system
Coins & networks
The existing components could not represent coin and network information together, so I specified a reusable list item across anatomy, branding, states, layout and behaviour.
Balance handling
Balance segregation
Depending on the deposit method, part of a user’s balance may be restricted. Because this wasn’t clearly explained, users were left confused and concerned about their funds.
Education & support
Three How Might We questions focused on problems outside the flow: users needed to know the feature exists, understand what it does and get help part-way through. Each became part of the release, not a recommendation left in a deck.
07 · Systems and delivery
Design decisions continued into implementation planning.
I worked with Product and Engineering to divide the solution into three stages, prioritising user and business impact against effort.
The scope covered search by ticker, coin or network; network identification in the asset list; balance-segregation states; address-field behaviours; verification statuses; and market-specific service states.
The design system did not support the required coin-and-network row, so I specified a reusable component across anatomy, branding, behaviour, states, responsive layout and spacing.
08 · Outcome
More users reached the flow, while withdrawal volume continued to scale.
During the quarter after the redesign, first-page landings on Enter amount increased 25%. Monthly withdrawal volume grew from 10K to 15K transactions.
+25%
Increase in micro-conversions on the “Amount step” in the quarter after release.
+50%
Monthly volume. Withdrawals grew from 10K to 15K transactions during the quarter.
3.2 → 4.7
Ease of finding. Measured in testing, not in production: the live journey against the shipped entry point.
Beyond screens
A reusable coin-and-network component, a shared decision trail and a staged delivery plan supported future work.
What I would repeat
Keep the chain from evidence to prioritised problem to shipped decision visible. It helped different disciplines make trade-offs from the same facts.
What I would change
The programme was ambitious for the time available. I would reduce workshop exercises and protect more time for the activities most likely to change scope.