SpotTogether
A concept that cuts down the back-and-forth of group planning by collecting everyone's input up front — helping friends decide faster, more fairly, and within budget.
The Problem
Group trip planning starts with excitement but stalls fast — coordinating schedules, budgets, and preferences through group chats leads to indecision and plans that quietly fall apart. One person usually ends up holding it all together.
The Idea
Collect every member's preferences and budget up front, surface options that fit the group, and guide everyone from discussion to a final decision — all in one shared space.
User Interviews
Interviewed college students who'd recently planned a group outing, focused on real behaviors and friction points.
Participants: 5 college students, ages 19–23.
Affinity Mapping
Interview notes were synthesized into recurring themes that shaped the problem definition:
These pointed toward less cognitive load, faster input collection, and more equal participation.
How Might We
How might we help groups share preferences without pressure?
How might we reduce planning time while keeping decisions fair?
How might we keep the planning load off one person?
How might we surface affordable options earlier?
User Personas
Caleb
The Organizer
Runs group plans and gets worn down by conflicting opinions and scattered tools.
- One shared space instead of scattered chats
- Clear visibility into everyone's budget
- Less manual chasing for responses
Julia
The Busy Friend
Limited time and budget; frustrated when plans stall on slow responses.
- Quick, low-effort ways to share availability
- Budget-friendly options surfaced early
- Reminders so she doesn't miss a deadline
Empathy Map
Stress and disengagement traced back to unclear expectations and invisible progress — shaping features like saved lists, deadline reminders, and voting tools.
User Flow
Three flow variations were explored — a linear happy path, a progressive close-in flow, and a flexible alternative path — to surface where users hesitated and where the design needed clearer guidance.
Low-Fidelity Wireframes
Early wireframes tested layout and the core flows — hosting, voting, and reviewing results — before moving into visual design.
Branding & Design System
An earthy green palette with warm yellow accents signals approachability and trust. A reusable component system kept screens consistent.
Mid-Fidelity Wireframes & Testing
Validated layouts combined with the style guide, then tested for system feedback, logic clarity, and navigation through the Host a Session flow.
Deliverables & Impact
Final screens reflect a high task success rate and a smoother path to a group decision.
Decision Speed
Different paths revealed clear differences in speed, hesitation, and confidence across personas.
Emotional Response
Key moments showed where users felt uncertain or overwhelmed while planning.
Design Impact
These patterns shaped decisions that better support varying budgets, timelines, and group dynamics.