User Research Report: Paid Meetings Scheduling v0
User Research Report: Paid Meeting Scheduling
Date: March 12, 2025
Prepared by: Osinachi Patrick
other Contributors: Grok 3, xAI
TL;DR relevant to Meetwith
-
Executive Summary
This report synthesizes feedback from eight users—Alex Whitton, Anthony Olisa, Chioma Joy, Allen, Victor (via Busolami), Erin, and Michael Isaac—on their experiences with scheduling paid meetings. The research focuses on professionals such as consultants, coaches, trainers, and team leads who rely on efficient scheduling for group or one-on-one paid engagements. Key findings reveal common pain points, including scheduling delays, lack of visibility into availability, and inflexible tools, alongside desires for customization, integrations, and streamlined payment processes. These insights provide actionable opportunities to enhance a paid meeting scheduling tool like Meetwith.
Methodology
Feedback was collected from user interview sessions, interacting with people from diverse roles (e.g., trainers, consultants, academics, and product leads) who schedule paid or team meetings. Responses were analyzed for recurring themes, challenges, and feature requests. The synthesis focuses on usability, functionality, and user needs without altering the original context.
Key Findings
1. Current Scheduling Practices and Tools
- Tools in Use: Users rely on a mix of tools, including Microsoft Teams/Outlook (Anthony), Google Meet (Chioma), Zoom (Busolami/Victor), Slack, email, and manual calendar coordination (Alex, Michael).
- Process: Scheduling often involves back-and-forth communication via email, text, or chat (Alex, Michael), manual calendar checks (Chioma), or offline coordination (Busolami).
- Team Size: Teams range from 4 (Alex) to 12 (Anthony), with some managing larger cohorts (e.g., Michael’s 20-person PR group).
2. Pain Points
Scheduling Delays and Coordination Challenges
- Time-Consuming Process: Scheduling can take weeks due to delays in responses or availability confirmation (Alex, Chioma, Michael). Alex noted a kick-off meeting planned in December took until January to finalize.
- Visibility of Availability: Tools like Microsoft for Teams don’t show external participants’ availability (Anthony), and outdated calendars cause conflicts (Chioma, Michael).
- Back-and-Forth Communication: Significant time is spent chasing responses or suggesting alternatives (Allen, Michael). Alex had to follow up to remind team members to provide availability.
- Last-Minute Issues: Allen highlighted the inability to prevent last-minute bookings, while Chioma faced conflicts with organizational events due to unupdated calendars.
Tool Limitations
- Lack of Integration: Anthony’s team struggles with Microsoft Teams’ lack of external availability visibility and desires a tool that allows them schedule meetings with clients without adding them to a group. That is creating a group meeting without creating a group.
- Complexity for Clients: Allen’s clients find scheduling processes complex, risking disengagement.
- Context Loss: Victor mentioned losing conversation context with clients, suggesting a need for integrated chat features.
Flexibility and Customization
- Rigid Scheduling: Chioma and Michael noted issues when calendars aren’t updated or meetings conflict with mandatory engagements.
- Lack of Personalization: Erin wants a customized scheduling link with specific availability and branding options (layout, profile picture, colors).
Payment and Meeting Clarity
- Unclear Terms: Busolami emphasized the need for formal communication of payment terms and meeting conditions.
- Payment Process: Erin desires direct bank settlements for payments, bypassing intermediaries.
- Meeting Purpose: Erin stressed the importance of schedulers providing detailed meeting descriptions upfront.
3. User Needs and Preferences
- Streamlined Scheduling: Users want faster, less manual processes (Alex, Anthony, Allen). Chioma’s team experimented with appointment scheduling to streamline availability.
- Integration with Existing Tools: Anthony requested Microsoft Teams/Outlook integration; Chioma relies on institutional calendars appearing in her workflow.
- Customization: Erin seeks personalized links and themed displays; Busolami wants structured feedback mechanisms.
- Visibility and Control: Anthony and Chioma need tools showing everyone’s availability; Allen wants to block last-minute bookings.
- Payment Features: Erin and Busolami prioritize seamless payment collection and clear terms.
- Communication Features: Victor asked for a chat feature to maintain context; Michael uses Slack/text for team coordination.
- Hybrid Support: Michael’s team required hybrid (physical/online) meeting options due to availability constraints.
Insights and Opportunities
Pain Point Solutions
- Reduce Scheduling Friction:
- Develop real-time availability syncing across calendars (Google, Outlook, etc.) to address delays and visibility issues (Anthony, Chioma).
- Include a “suggest alternative times” feature to minimize back-and-forth (Allen, Michael).
- Enhance Tool Flexibility:
- Offer manual availability input for users resistant to automation/connecting their calendar (Anthony).
- Allow restrictions on last-minute bookings (Allen) and conflict alerts for outdated calendars (Chioma).
- Improve Client Experience:
- Simplify the scheduling interface for external participants (Allen).
- Add a chat feature to retain conversation context (Victor).
Feature Opportunities
- Integrations:
- Build Microsoft Teams/Outlook extensions (Anthony) and support for Google Meet (Chioma).
- Customization:
- Enable personalized scheduling pages with branding options (Erin).
- Allow detailed meeting descriptions in the scheduler (Erin).
- Payment Functionality:
- Integrate direct bank payment settlement (Erin) with clear terms communication (Busolami).
- Group Scheduling:
- Enhance group coordination for hybrid meetings (Michael) and large teams (Anthony, Chioma).