We’re Electric
Product Design Case Study
Market Discovery
Market Research - Steps
Competitive Benchmarking
Letting this hypothesis be my guide, I set about choosing competitors to benchmark for their UX, starting with the top-ranking results on Google for ‘electric car hire’ .
I took this approach because an exclusively EV car-hire service would aim to be top-ranking with that search term, and by extension any service that currently appears there would be competing for the searcher’s attention (even if they were not car hire services, which not all were).
Beyond the following services I found for benchmarking, there were a number of other major vendors appearing on the page 1 of that Google search. The major incumbent vendors being the main influence on the mental models of public car-hire service users, I knew I would need to look at these major vendors in the interviews anyway. Therefore I saw the current exercise as a chance to look more broadly at the market, given the findings in the orientation phase.
Services I investigated for benchmarking:
ONTO (EV car leasing)
SIXT (Major international car hire provider)
TURO (Emerging peer-to-peer hiring service)
VOLTAGE HIRE (UK-only EV hire)
+ GREENMOTION (a ‘green’ brand)
++ UBER (ride-sharing)
+ Green Motion was not showing up in the same search but I knew it to be a service that advertised green car hire, so I added this to the list too.
++ I added Uber as a wildcard because of my speculation during the orienation phase. It turns out they were innovating in both green ride-sharing and car hiring, but these services are not mature.
Heuristic Analysis
After noting down the above observations about each service, I scored the services against 10 common UX heuristics with a basic scoring system:
+1 for positive, -1 for negative, 0 for neutral.
I judged Uber to have a far better UX for its purposes than the other services (mainly car hire services) had for theirs.
As well as showing the individual services’ overall scores against these heuristics (see data table below), it was interesting to take the aggregate scores to see which heuristics scored high or low across all services (see area chart below).
As Uber was from another industry and was the leader in UX score, and because I didn't have a new service to compare yet, I used Uber as the comparator for a gap analysis. This gap chart gave me an idea of the heuristics in the sector where there might be competitive advantage if I could improve on them in the UX of the new service.
During this analysis I considered whether I was scoring for my use-case (green car hire), or am I scoring for each service in relation to its own mission, e.g. judging Uber on its own function as a ride-sharing app, as opposed to its ability to provide me with electric options.
I decided it was best to appraise the services predominantly based on their own mission because first and foremost I was appraising the UX of these services. For example, if I scored a service low because it wasn’t letting a user filter by electric vehicles, it might have a great filtering UX in all other ways that could still be applied to a new EV-only service.
While a separate analysis could be useful in future, around how climate-conscious other services were, at this stage making my all-EV car-hire idea more than a consideration in the research would close off possibilities, until a real need for such a service could be demonstrated from a user’s perspective.
Market Analysis
My hypothesis is that hiring via peer-to-peer services such as Turo and Uber will become commonplace.
Sixt is also attempting to more closely resemble the on-demand aspect of Uber ride-sharing but with the customer in the driving seat - the urban car club model.
Onto is looking at attracting the hiring and leasing markets to encourage monthly subscription to the use of a customer's choice of electric car, where they can frequently change the model of car according to their needs or desires.
Hire services seem to have put more attention on web experience design than mobile, whereas rideshare services are mobile-first. The best car-hire services (SIXT/Europcar/Turo) create a seamless experience that draw on the respective strengths of the two device-types.
There is also convergence in terms of service design: Uber’s recently released car-renting UX facilitates their existing connection between users and hire-car providers while Sixt moves toward ride-sharing culture with on-demand short trips, that SIXT indeed refers to as ‘ride-sharing’, where you can drop off the car in many local destinations and are not tied down by return deadlines.
One major finding during the benchmarking process was that, when you filtered only for EVs on major car hire services, there was not much choice of vehicle, and none in some locations. Therefore, achieving a more populated list exclusively of EVs would be an immediate advantage over any major car hire service.
Solution Analysis
My hypothesis is that hiring via peer-to-peer services such as Turo and Uber will become commonplace.
Sixt is also attempting to more closely resemble the on-demand aspect of Uber ride-sharing but with the customer in the driving seat - the urban car club model.
Onto is looking at attracting the hiring and leasing markets to encourage monthly subscription to the use of a customer's choice of electric car, where they can frequently change the model of car according to their needs or desires.
Hire services seem to have put more attention on web experience design than mobile, whereas rideshare services are mobile-first. The best car-hire services (SIXT/Europcar/Turo) create a seamless experience that draw on the respective strengths of the two device-types.
There is also convergence in terms of service design: Uber’s recently released car-renting UX facilitates their existing connection between users and hire-car providers while Sixt moves toward ride-sharing culture with on-demand short trips, that SIXT indeed refers to as ‘ride-sharing’, where you can drop off the car in many local destinations and are not tied down by return deadlines.
One major finding during the benchmarking process was that, when you filtered only for EVs on major car hire services, there was not much choice of vehicle, and none in some locations. Therefore, achieving a more populated list exclusively of EVs would be an immediate advantage over any major car hire service.
An important finding during the benchmarking process was that, when you filtered only for electric cars on major car hire services, there was not much choice of vehicle, and none in some locations.
Competitive Benchmarking
-
![]()
SIXT (Major international car hire provider)
Clear UX.
Need to re-check EV-only option with every new location you try.
Simple linear process but somewhat forces the user its way.
‘Important information’ prompt - it’s grey and almost blends into background so doesn’t look that important. I only noticed in seeing the screenshot again in my case study diary (i.e. after long-since visiting the page). For any real user who was as observant as myself or less this would create disappointment or confusion when I find out that the hire centre is actually a 5 minute wealk away from the published location. Effectively leaving the pick-up location unknown to the user without them knowing it’s unknown, is strong UX negative here.
-
![]()
VOLTAGE HIRE (UK-only EV hire)
Informative as regards ‘range anxiety’ and charging - easily accessible links.
More personal approach (e.g. chatbot for questions) and more localised provision.
Location of their HQ/depot is not hidden by any progressive disclosure etc. This confuses users as to whether it’s local or all UK, and (as it’s on an extremity of the landmass geographically) might discourage people far from that location (like me in Edinburgh) from applying, even if it says it offers an all-UK service.
-
![]()
ONTO (EV car leasing)
A new concept but a simple one, effectively explained on bold screen 1 without needing to scroll. A good reminder of the need for boldness and clarity with whatever aspects a service is doing differently.
Slider for cost comparison with leasing for each vehicle is clear and easy to use.
No way to compare visually between two vehicles at once, though.
Booking intuitive, immediately leads you to look at cars (the longer-term commitment of leasing puts focus more on model than dates/location etc)
Live chat for questions (requires email, which may be a deterrent for some users).
Clear explainers, educational material and help section.
-
![]()
UBER (International ride-sharing app)
Scores positive in most UX heuristics (see Heuristic Anaysis table)
Green option is hidden far down page, and localised - not useful for me in Edinburgh.
Investigation of a green business model being progressed by such a big company,suggests a market opportunity: Uber has recognised the value of being green. But their Green ride-sharing option is hidden far down page, and localised - not useful for me in Edinburgh.
If it is not rolling out a comprehensive global service. Someone else could…
-
![]()
TURO (Emerging peer-to-peer hiring service)
So many filters seems overkill at first, but does enable a very bespoke tailoring.
Persistent map with pick-up locations for filtered vehicles is a useful feature.
A bit buried but at least there is the option to filter on electric vehicles.
Lots of bio info which is more than major vendors don’t need to provide but is useful here to generate trust in the service and car-owners.
-
![]()
GREEN MOTION (a ‘green’ brand)
Even if I select Edinburgh via the locations page, it doesn’t put Edinburgh in the location automatically - I still need to add it manually.
Nothing happens at all when you click ‘Book Now’. You have to work out for yourself that you need to select a location first. The site’s highest-importance CTA, which is bold and inviting, and is likely many users’ first click interaction, effectively doesn’t work without the user’s help.
Even if I select Edinburgh via the locations page, it doesn’t put Edinburgh in the location automatically - I still need to add it manually.on the following page.
The ‘green‘ credentials are opaque and references in the copy are largely to collateral elements (eco cleaning, staff committed to recycling), as opposed to the technology of the cars themselves (electric/hybrid cars).
The service advertises itself as green but even in an affluent city like Edinburgh, there are no electric options.
… I’m seeing Red-motion!
Uber came out as the highest-scoring for UX, and it was also the most unlike a car hire service of the set. So I used Uber as a comparator service in a gap analysis where I compared its scores in each individual heuristic against the aggregate scores of the other services, to see where there might be a gap to improve upon in the new service.
* Uber would also have scored 1 on ‘Match between System and real world’ except that Uber’s EV ride-sharing service was not yet rolled out and it wasn’t clear that it was only a localised service in London.
Heuristic Analysis
After noting down the above observations about each service, I scored the services against 10 common UX heuristics with a basic scoring system.
(+1 for positive, -1 for negative, 0 for neutral)
Picture: Gap Analysis showing Uber, a different product than a car-hire service, scores better overall than the other services listed.
Picture: Note made during synthesis based on the above heuristic gap analysis, drawing a tentative conclusion about the car-hire sector’s overall UX.
Market and Solution analysis
meet a fork in road(map)
It was clear from secondary research and the longer battery ranges now available that we are at a turning point in electric car commerce. Primary research with potential users was now needed to help decide one of two directions for the UX of the new service …
1. At this point in the design cycle, success for a new service looked like an electric car hire service that leans on existing owners of EVs to provide more options to the target market whilst EV ownership is still a minority proportion of all cars. The service could potentially cater to shorter trips. This would favour use of electric vehicles while their range is still relatively limited, allows owners not to be without their cars for long periods, and suits a younger less wealthy demographic who can’t afford cars of their own let alone electric ones, and who may be also priced out of EV options at the incumbent major vendors (a statement based on the fact Turo had more cheap options than car-hire services do).
This would rely on the requirement to market the new service to EV holders in order to generate a supply for customers, and would also represent a more complex UX challenge in becoming a two-sided marketplace app.
2. However, if you were able to solve the supply issue more simply by aggregating the offerings of all major hire platforms for the specific use-case of EV cars, you would also have a simpler UX to build. And any customer looking specifically for electric would have a far more efficient and positive experience of booking an electric car on that new service, because there would be a simpler UX compared with Turo/P2P model, but also a multiple of choices compared with trawling the many individual major services - more of a UX headache only to find fewer options in each.