Five design questions derived from the research report. Each statement translates a finding into an open brief — specific enough to design from, open enough that multiple solutions could answer it.
5 statementsGrounded in 5 research methodsEquity platformApril 2026
How to use these statements
Each card contains the HMW statement, the insight it came from, supporting evidence, and possible design directions. Expand any card to see the evidence. Use the design directions as starting points — they are not constraints. Expand each card to explore the evidence behind the question.
01
Read the statement. Can you answer it in more than one way? If yes, it's well-formed.
02
Expand the card. Read the evidence. Make sure your design answer comes from what users actually said and did.
03
Start with Priority 1. Design one direction per statement before jumping to solutions.
Priority 1
Insight 01 — The slider front door makes people feel like the wrong audience for the tool. They think in life events, not percentages.
HMW 01Priority 1
Insight 01
How might we replace the slider front door with a question box so people can ask in their own words instead of guessing at the right percentage?
Six of six interview participants asked life-event questions ("when can I sell?", "what if I leave?"). Zero asked "what if the price moves X%?"
Quote
"I open it, look at the slider, and immediately go ask HR what it means for me." — P03, Norway
Data
3/4 usability participants asked about timing before price. 0/6 interview participants used the slider language.
Question box as default
Slider stays available as a secondary tool — accessible from a tab, not the front door.
Suggested-question chips
Start participants with 3-4 chips matching the most-asked life events from research.
Auto-suggest as they type
Lower the cold-start cost for the twice-a-year user who can't remember the vocabulary.
Slider as fallback
Surface only when the co-pilot can't parse the question intent.
Behavioural
Question-box engagement
Share of sessions where the user types or selects a question chip.
Target: 75%+ in first month
Usability
Time-to-first-answer
From session open to first useful answer rendered.
Target: under 45s
Qualitative
"This is for me" rating
Single Likert in post-session survey.
Target: 4+/5 average
Proxy
HR ticket volume
Tickets asking what their shares are worth right now.
Target: -40% in Q3
Don't optimise the slider away entirely — keep it for the small minority who actively want to model price movements.
Insight 01 (cont.) — When intent is ambiguous, participants want timing before they want price.
HMW 02Priority 1
Insight 01
How might we have the co-pilot lead with timing answers before price when the user's intent isn't clear from the question?
When asked "what's it worth", participants follow up with "and when can I sell?" three times out of four. The reverse never happens.
Quote
"Okay so it's worth this — but when can I actually do anything about it?" — P02, UK
Data
3/4 usability participants asked the timing question within 30 seconds of the price answer.
Lead-with-timing default
For "what's it worth?" type questions, the answer includes a sentence about when they can act.
Intent disambiguation chip
"Are you asking what it's worth, or when you can sell?" as a one-tap clarifier.
Behavioural
Follow-up rate
Sessions where the user asks a follow-up timing question.
Target: -50%
Usability
Task success — Task 2
"When can I sell?" task pass rate in usability testing.
Target: 4/4
HMW 03Priority 1
Survey + interviews
How might we surface country-aware tax explanations by default — not behind a toggle?
13/16 survey respondents said tax-by-country context would increase confidence. The current tool buries tax behind a settings panel.
Data
13/16 survey respondents (81%) want tax-by-country surfaced. 4/6 interviews mentioned comparing with a colleague's country.
Quote
"My colleague in London gets a totally different number — I never know if mine is right." — P05, Germany
Country in the header
Show the participant's country and tax timing alongside every answer, not in settings.
One-tap compare
"Compare with UK / NO / DE" tab on tax answers — answers the colleague question without asking.
Qualitative
Tax-confidence rating
"I'm confident the tool reflects my country's tax rules" — survey question.
Target: 4+/5 average
Behavioural
Compare-country uses
How often the compare-country interaction is used.
Target: 25% of tax sessions
Priority 2
Insight 02 — Recall between sessions is near-zero. The tool needs to come to participants when something has actually changed.
HMW 04Priority 2
Insight 02
How might we notify participants when an unlock or blackout window opens or closes — so they don't have to remember to check?
11/16 survey respondents asked for window notifications directly. 6/6 interview participants opened the tool twice a year or less.
Data
11/16 survey respondents (69%) asked for window notifications. Email + in-app preferred over either alone.
Quote
"I missed an unlock window once because I thought it was at year-end. Tell me." — P01, Norway
Opt-in by default
Toggle on at first session, with clear opt-out. Never auto-send unsolicited messages.
Email + in-app
Email for the calendar reminder, in-app banner for when the participant returns.
Behavioural
Notification click-through
From email notification to session.
Target: 30%+
Proxy
HR tickets — missed window
"I missed the unlock window" support tickets.
Target: -75%
HMW 05Priority 2
Insight 03
How might we design the co-pilot's refusal so it's safe to refuse — saying "that's a decision you make" without losing the user's trust?
4/4 usability participants took up the refusal redirect when it was paired with concrete scenarios. The condition is the redirect being specific, not generic.
Quote
"That actually felt fair — it gave me three things I could compare instead." — P06, UK
Data
4/4 usability participants took the redirect. 0/4 read the refusal as evasive.
Refusal + 3 concrete chips
"I can't recommend. Try: [compare 6mo] [if I leave] [next window]"
Explain the line
One sentence on why the tool won't recommend — short, factual, not legalese.
Qualitative
"Felt respectful" rating
Post-refusal Likert: "the answer felt fair, not evasive".
Target: 4+/5 average
Behavioural
Redirect take-up
Share of refusals where the user clicks one of the offered scenarios.