Strategic risk
Competitors with consumer networks were using brand recognition to strengthen their B2B position.
Razorpay · Strategic UX research
Two-sided marketplace validation
Should Razorpay build a consumer rewards product?
I led merchant and consumer research to evaluate a proposed rewards platform for a B2B fintech. The study tested merchant willingness to pay, consumer interest, and alternatives to the original proposition.
40+ merchant interviews1,000+ survey responsesUnder NDA
My role
Lead UX Researcherframing, study design, fieldwork, synthesis, executive recommendation
Timeline
10 weeksMay 2024
Collaborators
Product strategy and designplus a market researcher for the consumer survey
Scope
Merchant interviews, consumer focus groups, participatory design, and quantitative validation
At a glance
The study evaluated whether the proposition created enough value for merchants and consumers.
Research approach
Merchant willingness to pay and consumer willingness to adopt were investigated in parallel.
Outcome
The findings informed revisions to the proposition and the executive investment decision.
Project context
Razorpay needed to test a consumer-network strategy before committing substantial investment.
Razorpay identified a strategic threat: competitors with consumer networks were beginning to win B2B business through brand recognition. The strategy team proposed a two-sided rewards marketplace where merchants funded rewards that consumers could earn across brands.
Leadership needed to understand merchant willingness to pay, consumer adoption, and where the needs of both groups overlapped. I partnered with a product strategist to plan the study around the investment decision.
Research questions
We studied merchants and consumers in parallel.
Would merchants fund it?
Identify valuable outcomes, barriers to participation, integration readiness, target segments, and willingness to pay.
Would consumers adopt it?
Measure willingness to try, comfort with data sharing, trust drivers, shopping pain points, and feature priorities.
Methodology
We used merchant interviews, consumer focus groups, and a survey.
01
Merchant interviews
- Purpose
- Understand the outcomes merchants valued, barriers to participation, integration readiness, target segments, and willingness to pay.
- Method
- I conducted more than 40 interviews with decision-makers across company size, purchase frequency, and industry. The sessions included a budget-allocation exercise, participatory design, concept evaluation, and a willingness-to-pay discussion.
- Output
- The interviews showed limited interest in the original proposition and generated alternatives for a revised concept.
- 40+
- decision-makers
- 50
- minutes each
- 3
- sampling dimensions
- 2
- participatory exercises
02
Consumer focus groups
- Purpose
- Understand D2C shopping behavior, trust, and post-purchase needs before designing the survey.
- Method
- I conducted focus groups using journey mapping, storytelling, and progressive concept testing.
- Output
- The focus groups identified themes, behavioral archetypes, and questions for quantitative validation.
03
Consumer survey
n = 1,000+ respondents
- Purpose
- Measure the prevalence and priority of needs identified in the focus groups.
- Method
- I worked with a market researcher to field a survey that measured willingness to try, feature priorities, behavioral archetypes, data-sharing comfort, and perceived value.
- Output
- The survey quantified consumer interest and identified the features and audience segments most relevant to the decision.
Key finding
The original proposition generated little merchant interest, and the research identified an alternative model.
Participatory design during the merchant interviews identified an alternative model that could be evaluated with merchants and consumers.
Original proposition
A merchant-funded rewards marketplace.
Merchant response
Limited willingness to fund the proposed value.
Participatory design
Merchant interviews generated alternative models.
Revised direction
An alternative could be evaluated across both sides of the market.
Decision map
Each research input informed a specific part of the product strategy.
Research input
Consumer behavioral archetypes
Decision informed
Prioritize the consumers most likely to adopt.
Research input
Feature priorities
Decision informed
Separate MVP requirements from later additions.
Research input
Merchant outcomes and willingness to pay
Decision informed
Replace the original proposition with one grounded in merchant value.
Research input
Differences between merchant segments
Decision informed
Focus the go-to-market strategy on the most viable contexts.
Impact
Executive decision
Leadership used the research to decide the investment structure, phasing, success metrics, and go-to-market direction for the proposed product vertical.
The strategy evolved toward a trust and reliability proposition for D2C consumers. Participation throughout the study also created shared understanding across product, strategy, and executive teams.
What I learned
Defining the research around the investment decision
This project reinforced the importance of matching the methods and sample size to the decision and level of risk. Studying merchants and consumers in parallel prevented us from judging the proposition based on consumer interest alone.