Case Study
Reducing inventory loss through pickup prevention and returns
Field experts could collect new phones even when devices from previous deliveries remained unreturned. I researched the reasons behind outstanding returns, proposed a change to the pickup workflow, and designed an experience that required experts to return those devices or receive a coach-approved exception before continuing.
Outcome
Contributed to an 18% reduction in lost inventory
As reported by Operations.
Role
UX Researcher & Designer
Partners
Product Management, Engineering, and Operations
Platform
Asurion Field App · Mobile
Scope
FSL pickup prevention and returns
The Problem
Asurion’s field experts delivered replacement phones to customers after an approved claim, sometimes providing device setup as well. Each morning, experts collected phones from a Forward Stocking Location, or FSL: a local warehouse holding inventory for deliveries.
When a delivery could not be completed, the phone was supposed to be returned the following day. A customer might be unavailable, there might be no safe place to leave the device, or the expert might be unable to finish the job.
However, outstanding returns did not prevent experts from collecting more phones. New inventory continued to leave the warehouse while earlier devices remained unaccounted for.
My Role
I owned research and design for the pickup-prevention and returns experience within the Field App.
I created the research plan, held the kickoff, conducted interviews and stakeholder discussions, and synthesized the findings into a proposal for Operations. I then worked through the operational implications with Product Management, Engineering, and Operations before designing the experience for an initial pilot.
Research Goals
Research Approach
I began with a research plan and kickoff. Discussions with Product Managers and engineers focused on the inventory problem, business impact, technical feasibility, and limitations of the existing process.
I spoke with field experts about devices they still had, devices they believed they had returned, and what happened when a delivery could not be completed.
These conversations surfaced different explanations for outstanding inventory. Some experts said a phone had been returned. Others reported it lost or said it had been delivered, even when that account was disputed.
I synthesized the findings into a proposal to prevent new pickup until outstanding returns were resolved, with a coach-reviewed exception path.
What the Research Revealed
Experts reported phones as lost, already returned, or delivered. In some cases, their accounts conflicted with customer reports.
Design implication: The experience needed to identify the specific devices in question and allow experts to explain discrepancies.
The existing process allowed experts to continue collecting inventory while earlier returns remained outstanding.
Design implication: The start of a new pickup was an opportunity to require action before issuing additional devices.
An expert’s explanation did not always resolve where the phone was. Follow-up could involve a coach, a customer, or a carrier.
Design implication: A pickup restriction needed an exception path with enough information to support a coach’s decision.
Operations Partnership
Pickup prevention had consequences beyond inventory. A restriction could affect whether an expert received jobs, when deliveries started, and whether the expert could work that day.
With stakeholders, I discussed:
Research to Design
Experts could collect new devices while previous returns remained outstanding.
Add a checkpoint that prevents new pickup.
Require action on outstanding returns before additional inventory is issued.
Experts reported different statuses for outstanding devices.
Show the devices due for return and provide access to device details.
Make the requirement specific enough to act on or dispute.
Some discrepancies required investigation.
Capture a reason for each outstanding device in an exception request.
Give coaches context for reviewing the situation.
A restriction could affect an expert’s ability to work.
Include a coach-controlled approval or denial path.
Allow exceptions while retaining oversight of unresolved inventory.
The Experience I Designed
Outstanding returns appeared in the expert’s daily workflow. Experts could identify exactly which phones needed returning, then open the return list to review the individual devices.
The central intervention: unresolved returns prevent new pickup unless an exception is approved.
Different device situations require different explanations. The exception flow captures a reason for each outstanding device and gives experts a way to add context when a listed reason does not fit.
The submitted request creates a clear coach decision point. Approval allows pickup to continue; denial explains the restriction and directs the expert to their coach.
Request submitted
Approved
Denied
Outcomes
Operations reported an 18% reduction in lost inventory associated with the workflow improvements. Pickup prevention contributed by requiring outstanding devices to be addressed before experts collected additional inventory.
Source: Inventory reporting provided by Operations.
Reflection
The central challenge was deciding how to introduce an inventory restriction when an outstanding record did not always explain what had happened to the device.
Research helped distinguish the situations the experience needed to support. Working with Operations helped account for the consequences of a restriction, including delayed assignments and an expert’s ability to work.