Customers prefer fast, minimal input when submitting issues, often omitting technical details, while handypeople require comprehensive information to provide accurate diagnoses, creating a mismatch in expectations. I explored some solutions to tackle this challenge.

❌ Direct messenger for handypeople to gather more info
→ Too time-consuming for handypeople before the customer commits to paying
→ Risk of communication moving outside the app

✅ Hybrid question flow (multiple choice + free text) for the MVP
→ AI asks any additional questions needed for an accurate diagnosis

✅ Follow-up question feature
→ Allows handypeople to request more info when necessary, without enabling direct chat

To address this, we asked tailored, case-specific questions to reduce irrelevant inputs while ensuring the information was detailed enough for handypeople to make an accurate diagnosis.

We only had one handyperson available for testing, which limited the variety of feedback. Instead, a different research and testing approach was chosen to continue progress despite limited access. I decided to use these channels to extract insights:

❓ Quora: Search for questions related to DIY repairs, challenges in hiring handymen, or frustrations with current home repair options.

▶️ YouTube: Analyze comments under DIY repair videos where users express what was difficult, what was missing, or what they needed more help with.

📱 App reviews (Competitor analysis): Review platforms like TaskRabbit and Thumbtack on app stores or forums to gather pain points and feature suggestions from users. Most competitor platforms focus on on-site services and struggle with high commissions, slow background checks, poor job-skill matching, rigid pricing, rating penalties for cancellations, and a lack of user-centered design and transparency.