2. “Each design is a proposed business
solution — a hypothesis. Your goal is to
validate the proposed solution as efficiently
as possible by using customer feedback.”
― Jeff Gothelf
MANIFESTO
3. Feb 2016 Jun 2017Jun 2016 Jan 2017
PRODUCT
DESIGN
INTERN
PRODUCT
DESIGNER
PRODUCT
OWNER
- Worked with PM
to improve the
experience of the
product
- Created digital
and print contents
for marketing
- Prototyped multiple
MVPs to find our niche
market
- Interviewed with 10+
recruiters to
understand the market
and potential users
- Managed product team
to deliver Talentseer 2.0,
including prioritize
features, roadmaps and
task management
- Led the end-to-end
research and design
process and coded the
front-end as well
- Created style guide and
build the css library
ROLE & TIMELINE
4. TALENTSEER 2.0
A SaaS product for helping staffing agency
to increase sourcing productivity
PRODUCT INTRODUCTION
5. PROBLEM STATEMENT
• Providing the organization a structured and
usable talent database.
• Allow the organization to collaborate around
data during the whole process.
• Automate sourcing and recruiting process.
6. DESIGN PROCESS
Competitive Research
I investigated similar products – Greenhouse, Jobvite,
Level, Workable, Hiretual, etc – to identify painpoints and
where TalentSeer can be unqiue.
Foundational Research
I started with understanding our target users -
recruiters. I recruited and led 13 user interviews
and gathered insights.
7. DESIGN PROCESS
Design Sprint
Led sessions with PM, Eng, Design, Marketing
and Ops to analysis and define the users and
goals of the product.
14. STYLE GUIDE
We started by looking
at the Material design
guidelines and other
template published
online, gradually
created our own style
guide with CSS-library.
16. Internal Talent
Database
FOCUS AREAS
We make everyone you
viewed on LinkedIn become
part of your own resources.
Not only yours, the talent
database is shared within the
organization.
17. Chrome Extension
on LinkedIn
FOCUS AREAS
We created this chrome
extension to bring seamless
sourcing experience between
our ATS and other sourcing
platform, like LinkedIn.
21. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Provide the organization a structured and
shared internal talent database for
recruiters to search and maintain.
22. ONSITE FEEDBACKS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
A: Most of users does not click into to view
details.
B: Lack of information that recruiters care, like
contact info, social media…
C: It is convenient to click skills to start
search. However, most users did not notice
this function.
D: No one uses tag function. The assumption
of this is to provide users a flexible way to
organize their talents.
E: Nobody uses the note function. The
purpose of notes is to make collaboration
easily to view other recruiter’s notes for a
candidate.
F: In most cases, this top area is blank.
G: Users complains the plain text of the
summary section and job details section.
H: Contact information is the most important
section for recruiters. However, the editing
process is way more complicated.
23. MAIN PAIN POINTS
Lack of
Information
No motivation
for recruiters
to maintain
Searching
experience is
too complex
24. ONSITE FEEDBACKS
How easy and intuitive to search through the talent pool?
(On a scale from 1 to 10, how many people rate over 7?)
How easy and intuitive to edit talents’ data?
(On a scale from 1 to 10, how many people rate over 7?)
21%
6%
25. USER STORY - INFORMATION
What is the top three information sourcers
care?
Contact Information AvailabilityCurrent title & Company
87%92% 64%
26. USER STORY - MAINTAIN
What things can motivate sourcers to
maintain candidate’s information?
Money Bonus Peer Pressure
92% 75%
27. USER STORY - SEARCH
Type search
strings in the
search bar
Use filter to
narrow down
the results
Open Profile
Add as
prospect
Easy Hard
Recruiters use filter different based on
the difficulty of searching
Active Looking
Location
Expertise
Years of Experience
Expertise
Years of Experience
Contact Info
29. TALENT POOL
Hi, XiaojianJobs Talent Pool Manage Team
Personal Talent Pool (399)Talent Pool Shared Talent Pool (5,799)
Search People and Tags…
…
Alan Fletcher
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Gertrude Henry
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Interview"
…
Minnie Rivera
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Mary Townsend
Product Manager at TalentSeer
2 Positions"
Millie Reid
Product Manager at TalentSeer
…
John Martin
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Milton Burton
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
Donald Holmes
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Estelle Gomez
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Dennis Rowe
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Sean Park
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Connor Dunn
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Sophia Ray
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
…
Benjamin Sullivan
Product Manager at TalentSeer
Softrware Engineer | Prospect"
85% Match with Product Manager
BY JOB
BY STAGE
BY STATUS
FILTER
#
APPLIED FILTER
#
#
BY RATING #
All
Open to Market
All
All
All
Viewed
Interviewed
Offered
$
15
33
1
15
$
clear all
35 Match
Open to Market %
v1.1 v1.2
Contact Information is not
obvious enough.
Users likes this version of filter
which has a more clear visual
hierarchy.
Users prefer to view contact
info directly. However, 5
candidates on one page is not
efficient way to review
candidates.
30. TALENT POOL
v2.1 v2.2
Skills is not the thing
recruiters will view at the
beginning.
The ownership of the
candidate motivates users to
contribute on talent database.
32. SEARCH RESULTS
v1.1 v1.2
v1.3
Sort by relevance, no highlight
Highlight everything which
contains the keyword
Highlight only skills contains
the keyword
37. IMPACTS AND FUTURE
How easy and intuitive to search through the talent pool?
(On a scale from 1 to 10, how many people rate over 7?)
How easy and intuitive to edit talents’ data?
(On a scale from 1 to 10, how many people rate over 7?)
21%
6%
76%
89%