Improving the completion rate of a key sales-funnel entry point by a third
Role
Sole product designer
Scope
Research, diagnosis, redesign
While working for a heritage collectibles and auction company, I was tasked with improving the completion rate of the valuation request Typeform, which acted as the primary entry point for people wanting to consign their items to auction. The form was sitting at a completion rate of around 30% and taking users around 9 minutes from start to finish. By making small changes based on the insight that users were being asked for things mid-flow they hadn’t been told to prepare, I was able to increase the completion rate to around 40% and cut the completion time to 7 minutes.
Valuations form flow before and after
The problem
The form sat at the top of the consignment funnel on the auction website's Sell page. Every completed submission had the potential to become an item sold at auction, so a low completion rate meant losing out on business.
Looking at the data, I noticed that desktop submissions took longer than mobile. My hypothesis was that the required photo-upload step was the friction point, as taking and uploading photos is easier on a mobile device, whereas desktop users may not have images to hand. Potential consignors appeared to reach the upload stage, realise they weren't prepared, and abandon the form.
Understanding the consignment process
Before jumping into redesigning the form, I first spoke with the Head of Auctions to understand what happened to a submission after the auctions team received it and whether we were capturing the right amount of information at this stage in the process. Having this conversation early kept me from optimising the form in isolation and helped me separate what the form genuinely needed from what could be removed to reduce friction.
What I changed
Setting expectations upfront
The biggest issue wasn't how the form looked or the flow, but instead that users were being allowed to start the form unprepared. To combat this I added a note that appeared before people even started the form, explaining that they'd need a description of their item and one to three photos. This let users gather what they needed up front rather than being surprised by these requirements halfway through and dropping out.
Replacing industry specific language and improving clarity
The first step of the form asked users what they were looking for, including the options “A general valuation” and “To consign to auction”. I replaced these with clearer options that removed industry-specific terminology: “A valuation for my item” and “A valuation and to sell my item”. This removed the assumption that users understood auction-house language and made clear a valuation was included in either selection.
Removing an unnecessary step
The final step of the form asked users to confirm they had legal authority to sell the item. During my conversation with the Head of Auctions, I discovered this wasn't required at the valuation stage and was adding friction without value, so I removed it from the form, shortening the path to submission.
The result
Completion rate rose from around 30% to around 40%, an increase of roughly one third.
Average completion time fell from about 9 minutes to 7.
Because the form fed the consignment pipeline, more completed submissions meant materially more items entering the sales process.
Reflection
The highest-impact change wasn't a change to the flow, it was setting expectations up front by telling users what they'd need before they started the form. The other lesson was the value of talking to the Head of Auctions early on in the process to discover what happens to submissions after a user completes the form. This understanding was vital in informing the screens I kept, removed, and clarified, which ultimately led to better results.