USAA Repair Manager
SERVICES
UX Writing, Content Design
THE GOAL
Boost satisfaction for members and reduce painpoints caused by the clarity of our copy inside our Repair Manager flow.
THE STRATEGY
Collaborate with cross-functional partners on solutions. I worked with design to map and update the flow, and collaborated with our auto physical damage team.
OUTCOMES
Member satisfaction. New content led to a 25% increase in containment and a 12% decrease in complaint verbatims around this experience over three months.
The Repair Manager flow is one of our most critical digital experiences, allowing members to schedule inspections, repairs, and rental cars in a fully self-service format. By reducing the need for phone support, this tool helps improve operational efficiency while driving higher member satisfaction.
However, one section of the flow—Method of Inspection—was generating confusion and a high volume of support calls. Members often didn’t understand the photo estimation process, which led to frustration, missteps, and dropped tasks. For a tool designed to streamline the experience, this pain point was a clear blocker.
We identified that the content in this section was too vague and failed to explain what photo estimation actually involves, what members need to do, and how long it might take. The lack of clarity created anxiety during a stressful time—right after an auto incident—when reassurance and guidance are most important.
Defining the problem
The Method of Inspection step within our Repair Manager flow was one of the top sources of member confusion and support calls. While the broader tool was designed to empower members to self-serve—scheduling inspections, repairs, and rentals—this particular step became a bottleneck in the experience.
The root issue was a lack of clarity around the photo estimation option. At USAA, we don’t perform photo estimates in-house; instead, we partner with a third-party vendor, CCC. Once a member selects this method and provides their information, they receive a text message from CCC with a link to begin the process.
However, this handoff wasn't clearly explained in the UI or the content. Members often didn’t realize they’d be interacting with an external vendor or that they should expect a text to continue. Many thought something had gone wrong or that the task was incomplete, leading to unnecessary calls and frustration.
The content failed to answer three key questions:
Who is CCC and why am I hearing from them?
What should I expect after choosing photo estimation?
How long will the process take and what do I need to do?
This gap in communication created uncertainty during a critical moment, when members needed reassurance and clear next steps.
Photo estimate learn more - Before
The first thing to look at was how we set expectations. We’re telling our members to take photos. You have to do it in the app. They’ll have spent time taking photos for us only to have to do it again.
We even set expectations that members should “Take Photos of My Vehicle” with the title.
We set the expectation that the text comes from us. There’s not real estate to put the partner company info here, but we can at least stop stating that it comes from us.
Photo estimate learn more - After
I changed the title to “Get a Photo Estimate,” so member stop taking photos and sending them to their adjusters before getting the app link.
In the bulleted list, I called out that their actions will be completed in a mobile app and that they will get instructions.
I took out all the “we” stuff.
Photo estimate final screen - Before
Again, the text says we’re texting a link. Not true. There is nothing here about the wait or the other company. If I hit "Continue,” I am going to expect that text immediately. Also, the CTA closes the modal, there’s no confirmation screen.
Photo estimate final screen - After
The supporting copy here is clearer and lets the member know about the wait, which was the highest point of friction, according to member satisfaction data.
The CTA closes the modal, there’s no confirmation screen. I asked for one in another iteration, but the SME doesn’t think she’ll get the budget for it. I pushed for it to be in the backlog, but for the time being, “Submit" give the members more closure.