We used an exploratory approach focused on students and part-time workers (18–30).

Methods: literature reviews to ground assumptions, surveys for quantitative patterns (how often they search, key pain points, desired features), interviews for deeper stories and needs, and a competitive analysis to evaluate current platforms’ strengths and gaps.
Goal: understand motivations, struggles, and needs to inform a better flexible-jobs solution.

Literature review:

Key findings in our review:

• 36–39% of U.S. workforce freelanced in 2022 — flexible work is rapidly growing.

• 54% of independent workers worry about stability vs 35% of permanent employees — trust and reliability are key issues.

• Platform work in Europe is small but expanding, with challenges in regulation and working conditions. (Eurofound)

Survey:

We conducted a online survey to explore the experiences of students and part-time workers with flexible jobs. The survey was designed around our research goals, making sure every question helped us understand the real experiences of our participants.

Our aim was to collect both quantitative data (patterns, frequency, main challenges) and qualitative insights (motivations, personal stories) to guide the design of Flexee.

Interviews:

We conducted interviews with 4 participants to better understand our target audience.

Format:

• Semi-structured, open-ended conversations

• Each session lasted 20–30 minutes

Purpose was to capture students and part-time workers real experiences and perspectives in searching flexible jobs and to understand how we can help.

Focus areas:

• Understanding needs, challenges, and frustrations in flexible work

• Identifying barriers to finding and keeping jobs

• Exploring when flexible work is most needed (exam periods, financial gaps, weekends, etc.)

• Investigating what kind of jobs they are searching for (cafés, restaurants, retail)

• Discovering opportunities for digital support to simplify the process

Reports:

Competitive analysis:

Competitor analysis of seven competitors, including features and SWOT analysis, helped us understand our competitors.

This helped us identify how they undertake similar challenges and find opportunities to offer unique solutions, while providing a competitive edge.

Data collection:

Data, after conducting research, competitor analysis, literature reviews and interviews, was organized as the facts in the spreadsheet.

Affinity mapping:

After collecting facts from research, I performed affinity mapping. This helped me to visualize and group all the research findings and insights into different categories.

To see whole affinity map CLICK HERE

Persona:

Ideation:

To find a solution for our users we have used different ideation techniques:

• BRAINSTORMING - we used Miro where we generated ideas.

• MINDMAPPING - this allowed us to visualize our ideas.

• DOT VOTING - was our method to vote on the best option

Key insights:

Students need trust (verified employers, ratings) and clarity (pay/hour, schedule).

• Jobs are often needed last-minute (non-exam periods, holidays, weekends).

• Existing platforms feel cluttered or not tailored to short-term roles.

• Filtering by availability and fast contact reduce drop-off.

• Scam-risk in groups increases anxiety; users want a single reliable place.

Problem framing:

How might we help students quickly discover trustworthy, short-term jobs that match their availability—while giving employers a simple way to publish verified, transparent roles?

IA & Flows:

We defined the core user flows: Browse & filter jobs, Set availability, View job details, Apply/Contact, and Manage shifts (drop/confirm).
I worked on task flows and user flow to validate navigation and reduce steps to apply.

Design system:

We established a minimal system: colour tokens, type scale, spacing (8-px base), and reusable components (job card, tag/filter chip, calendar cell, button states).
I ran contrast checks (WebAIM) to meet WCAG 2.1/2.2 AA for small text and UI components. Focus states, error text + icons, and motion guidelines were applied for accessible interactions.

Wireframes & Prototype

We explored layouts for job cards, details, calendar availability, and filters. Low-fi sketches helped decide hierarchy (pay/hour, verified badge, urgency). I produced low-fi screens and progressed to high-fi, aligning with our design system.

Low fidelity wireframes

High-fidelity frames

Prototype

To see full prototype CLICK HERE

Usability testing:

Method: 5 moderated tests (remote).
Tasks: Find a shift for tomorrow; filter by pay & verified; set availability; drop a shift.
Findings → Changes

• Users overlooked pay on cards → increased font weight & placed higher in hierarchy.

• Confusion about “drop shift” wording → changed to Drop shift + confirmation dialog with consequences.

• Filter overwhelm → grouped filters (Urgent, Verified, Pay, Distance) and added quick chips.

• Calendar tap targets too small → increased size to meet mobile target guidelines.