Portfolio / Fitness App / Chapter 2

Chapter 2: Fixing Navigation

Making it easier to find and start a workout

Why I focused on navigation

After understanding why people were leaving in Chapter 1, one pattern kept surfacing: people couldn’t find what they were looking for. Before designing anything new, I stepped back to examine how content was organized and labeled.

My role: I led the information architecture audit, defined the navigation hypotheses, designed the tab bar variants, and ran usability testing. I partnered with product and engineering to ship the final navigation and validate it through an iOS A/B test.

I conducted a lightweight audit of the app’s information architecture (IA) to understand how content was grouped and how users were expected to navigate.

Current Information Architecture

Current information architecture

What I noticed

Most of the app’s content lived behind a few very broad entry points. The largest of these was On Demand. From a system perspective, this made content easier to manage. From a user’s perspective, it meant guessing. Users had to tap into sections, scan the screen, and then decide whether they were in the right place; or back out and try again. I then looked at the tab bar itself and the labels we were using.

Annotated tap bar

Current tap bar and labels.

My initial hypotheses

Based on this audit, I formed a few hypotheses to test. I believed “On Demand” was too vague and forced people to explore instead of decide. I also thought that live content needed to be clearly labeled as "Live", not hidden behind a generic term like “Classes”. And finally, I suspected that help and support didn’t need to live at the top level of the app to still be easy to find.

Rather than debating these ideas internally, I decided to test them with non-users.

Usability testing with Maze

I ran a comparative usability test using Maze with 93 participants, testing three navigation variants head-to-head:

Variatns

Three tab bar variants tested

Participants were given a prototype and asked to complete four tasks:

  • Start a HIIT workout
  • Begin a 2-week beginner program
  • Update their profile photo
  • Contact support

The goal was to measure not only task success, but also confidence in navigation paths, misclicks, and hesitation.

High-level findings

Clear, specific labels consistently outperformed broad or ambiguous ones.

Across all tasks, variants using explicit content-based labels (Live, Workouts, Programs) reduced hesitation and improved first-choice accuracy compared to abstract or overloaded labels (On Demand, Explore, For You).

Navigation variants

Variatn1

V1: Current navigation (the baseline)

What worked

Users correctly associated:

  • Classes with workouts (89%).
  • Help with billing support (85%).
  • Profile with account settings (86%).

What didn't work

  • Live vs on-demand confusion: Only 56% tapped Classes to join a live class; 29% went to On Demand, indicating unclear boundaries between live and recorded content.
  • Programs were not discoverable: Users split almost evenly between Classes (46%) and On Demand (40%) when looking for a multi-day program. Clear evidence of label overload.
  • Inefficient task completion: The HIIT task had the longest average completion time (173.6s) and the lowest in-flow success (31%), with very high misclick rates.

Conclusion

The current structure technically works, but relies heavily on user guessing rather than clear decision-making.

Variatn2

V2: Explicit content buckets

What worked

Strong label-to-task alignment across the board:

  • Find a Yoga workout → Workouts (94%).
  • Find a Program → Programs (81%).
  • Live class → Live (94%).
  • Account changes → Account (97%).
  • Billing help → Support (90%)

Faster and more confident decisions than the current navigation in most tasks.

What didn't work

  • Despite clear labels, the HIIT task still showed a lower success rate (65.5%) and high misclicks, suggesting issues beyond top-level navigation (likely content layout or filtering) rather than label meaning
  • Some users noted overlap between Live and Workouts, indicating a mild mental-model conflict (“Live workouts are also workouts”).

Conclusion

Provided the clearest mental model overall. Explicit labels significantly reduced ambiguity, even if deeper IA still needs refinement.

Variatn3

V3: Reduced tabs and conceptual labels

What worked

  • Live content clarity was excellent:
96% correctly chose Live Classes for real-time sessions.
  • Profile tasks were unambiguous:
93% correctly selected Profile for account changes.
  • Overall success rates were high for most tasks.
  • Account changes → Account (97%).

What didn't work

  • “Explore” was consistently ambiguous: Used correctly for programs (81%), but split heavily for workouts (44% Explore vs 52% Live Classes)
  • Qualitative feedback repeatedly flagged uncertainty around what Explore and For You contained.
  • HIIT and program tasks still showed very high misclick rates (≈75–79%), despite acceptable success rates, users eventually succeeded, but not confidently.

Conclusion

Reducing tabs improved simplicity, but abstract labels shifted the burden onto user interpretation, especially for first-time discovery.

Hypotheses validation

Hypothesis
Outcome
“On Demand” is too vague / overloaded
Confirmed. Caused split decisions, long task times, and misclicks
“Classes” needs clarification as live
Confirmed. “Live” or “Live Classes” dramatically improved accuracy
Help may not belong in main navigation
Partially confirmed. When labeled clearly (Support), users found it instantly; when hidden (V3), they defaulted to Profile

The decision

Based on both testing and real user behavior, I chose the navigation that used clear, content-based labels as the foundation going forward.

We kept the structure familiar, moved Programs to its own page, moved Help inside account, and changed labels to make the meaning of each tab obvious:

Variatn1

Validating the changes in the real app

To make sure this wasn’t just a usability test result, we shipped the new navigation as an A/B test on iOS.

With real users, the new navigation helped people start faster, make fewer wrong taps, and begin more workouts and programs.

This confirmed that clearer navigation wasn’t just easier to understand—it directly helped people start working out.

Even after shipping this change, there is still room to improve. I think there are smaller opportunities within the same tab navigator; like testing icon choices, label text size, and visual emphasis.

Why this mattered

This wasn’t about making the app “look better”. It was about removing small points of friction that stopped people before they ever began. By making navigation clearer, we reduced the mental effort required to start a workout, which was exactly the problem I described in Chapter 1.

Once starting felt easier, the next problem became obvious: helping people come back again. That’s what the next chapter focuses on.