Personal case study
UX Design
2024

Mobiliteit: A casestudy rethinking Luxembourg’s most popular transport app

The story

Imagine spending three hours commuting to work each morning and another three hours returning home. This is the daily reality for many commuters in the small country of Luxembourg. With the highest number of cars per capita in the European Union, Luxembourg's roads are congested.

To combat this, the government made public transport free, hoping to lure people away from their cars. According to the 2022 census, car ownership saw a slight decline, with 681 cars per 1000 inhabitants, down from 690. However, the broader impact of this initiative remains unclear.

Faced with the choice of enduring long public transport commutes or relying on congested roads, many residents in Luxembourg grapple with a daily dilemma. However, after many conversations with my friends about their experiences with Luxembourg public transport, I became to understand that the frustration often stems from poor information design and navigation difficulties.

To explore this further, I decided to conduct a UX case study on Luxembourg's most popular transport app, Mobiliteit. My aim is to uncover the real pain points and propose solutions to make public transport more accessible and user-friendly, ultimately encouraging more people to leave their cars at home.

Research

Geographical information

Luxembourg is a small, landlocked country in Western Europe. It’s known for its small area, dynamic economy, and fast-growing population.

46% of Luxembourg’s workforce (200,000 people) commute from neighbouring countries each day.

Luxembourg feels more like a large metropolitan area than a country. It has a capital city called Luxembourg City, which is surrounded by closely connected towns and rural areas.

The capital city has frequent buses and a tram, while low frequency busses and trains cater to suburban and cross-border commuters.

Positives

Price (Public transport is free)
Availability of payment options
Cleanliness
Safety
Availability of seating
Distance from home to the nearest train station / bus stop

Negatives

Waiting times
Frequency of service
Punctuality and reliability of the service
Number of transfers necessary
In-vehicle travel time for buses

Statistics

48% Of full-time employed use buses daily
40% Of rural residents use busses daily
58% Of urban residents use busses daily
54% Of full-time employed use buses daily
76% Of people without cars use busses daily
33% Of people with full access to a car use busses daily

Survey

In a paper using data from an online survey on PT Use and Satisfaction in Luxembourg, organised by LISER (Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research), the following points were raised:

Commuters often have to recalculate their journeys while on the move.
Train delays are frequent and not consistently communicated or updated in the app.
Buses arrive at inconsistent times.
For journeys to new destinations, people rely on multiple apps due to poor search functionality in Mobiliteit.
Route cancellations are common but not reflected in the app, leading to confusion and delays.

User interviews

To delve deeper into the pain points identified through the survey, I conducted user interviews and discovered several recurring issues:

The current transport system in Luxembourg faces challenges like inconsistent schedules, unpredictable delays and cancelations, and poor rural connectivity.
I will focus on solving the following problems with information and user experience design.

Delays + cancelations
How might we inform the user about train delays and cancellations to plan their journey effectively?
Transfers
How might we support the user to arrive at their destination if they will miss their transfer?
Low frequency
How might we effectively allow users from low-frequency areas to plan journeys?

Problem definition

User testing the existing app

Step 1
Users start by entering their starting point and desired destination into the app.

User testing findings
Difficulty entering destination; shop not in Mobiliteit database.
User resorts to Google to find the nearest bus stop and pastes it into the app.

Step 2
After inputting their journey details, users are presented with a screen displaying various route options. This screen outlines travel times, mode of transport, and any necessary transfers

User testing findings
Confusion over displaying cancelled routes.
The users were uncertain whether they were cancelled or not.
Unclear iconography and excessive red highlights.

The core functionality of the Mobiliteit app is to provide travel advice and route planning from one destination to another. This is done through 3 screens. To gain insight on how Mobiliteit solves these problems, I conducted multiple user tests.

Step 3
Upon selecting a preferred route, users proceed to a screen that provides detailed navigation instructions. This includes departure times, platform or bus stop details, and estimated arrival times at each transfer point or final destination

User testing findings
Excessive red highlighting creates visual clutter.
Unclear relevance of displayed stops to the journey.
Inconsistent route naming conventions.
Overwhelming information with unclear importance.
Users manually calculate bus arrival times.

Competitor benchmark

To address the identified issues stated above, I conducted a competitor analysis to see how other transport apps manage similar problems. Here are some examples:

TFL: Effectively manages disruptions with clear notifications
9292: Provides clear real-time updates on delays
CityMapper: Offers flexible journey planning with recurrence options
Google Maps: Utilizes clear information design

Ideation

A set of lightning demos was conducted to explore potential design solutions inspired by the competitor analysis.
Lightning demos allow quick exploration of multiple ideas, promoting innovation and efficient problem-solving by examining existing solutions.

The best ideas from the lightning demos were refined through the Crazy 8s brainstorming method.
Crazy 8s is a valuable brainstorming method that encourages rapid ideation, helping to generate a wide range of creative solutions in a short period.

Prototype + testing

Based on the ideas from Crazy 8s, I created and tested a medium fidelity prototype in Figma focusing on improving advice selection screens and travel advice screens addressing the pain points identified in the case study thus far.

Route options and details
Focus on start time, end time, duration, and departure location.
Departure and arrival times are clearly updated on the cards. Cancelled travel advice is clearly indicated

User testing findings

Late times too prominent and sometimes irrelevant.Cancelled transfer advice appreciated but caused confusion about next steps.

Travel advice:
Simplified screens focusing on user needs. Additional journey info (e.g., temporary platforms) hidden behind cards.
View departure frequency and wait times at platforms.
‍Update journey by clicking other departures if a connection is missed.
‍Show updated arrival times

User testing findings
Information card needs more details.
If transport is on time, we need to reassure the user about its punctuality.
Departure frequency perceived as informational rather than interactive.
Overwhelming information with unclear importance.

The solution

To address the identified issues, we focused on improving the user experience through clear, concise, and real-time information. We streamlined navigation, prioritized essential details, and added key features such as real-time updates on delays and cancellations, selectable departures for missed transfers, and clear indications of transport schedules. These enhancements aimed to reduce user frustration and make commuting in Luxembourg more efficient and reliable, ultimately providing a smoother and more intuitive experience for all users.

Delays + cancelations
List items have been updated to provides clear, essential navigation info.
Excess red has been removed, cancelled journeys hidden, and times are shown with late time factored in. This results in a calmer user experience; effective delay and cancellation updates.
Delays + cancelations
‍Clearly shows late times with previous departure/arrival times providing effective delay updates.


Selectable Departures:
List of departures; update journey by clicking.
This helps if a transfer is missed due to delays or cancellations.
Delays + cancelations
On-Time Reassurance:
Indicates transport is on time.
This provides reassurance, discovered during testing.

Information Card:
Excess info hidden; brief descriptions added.
Clear, concise information without clutter.
Low frequency
Wait Times
Added wait times for stops.
This is useful in low-frequency transport areas.
Transfers
Something I found in testing is that we need to notify users of delays post-boarding with update options.

Ensures users are informed and can adjust plans during delays.

”View new times” will update the travel advice, “I’ll find my own way” button will take them back to the existing travel advice.

Conclusion

In our deep dive into Luxembourg’s transport system through the Mobiliteit app, we uncovered and tackled significant challenges. Our design process pinpointed key issues: informing users about delays and cancellations, assisting with missed transfers, and addressing low transport frequency in rural areas. We streamlined navigation, provided clear updates, and enhanced transfer options to make commuting smoother.

Key takeaways include  the importance of a user-centered approach, real-time information, and clear communication in public transportation apps. By incorporating user feedback through testing and iterating on our designs, we significantly improved the app's usability. The enhancements we implemented ensure a smoother and more intuitive commuting experience for Luxembourg's residents and visitors, addressing the unique challenges of its transport landscape.