Skip to content
Foundation Engagement Case Study

Downloads were real. Bookings weren’t. Here’s what we found.

Harley had qualified doctors, real availability, and working technology. What it didn’t have was trust. Users arrived anxious about their health, took one look, and left. The sessions revealed exactly why, and how to fix it.

The brief

The product worked. The experience didn’t.

Harley connects patients with private doctors fast, cutting through NHS waiting lists. Built by London based Meditech, the platform had everything it needed functionally. Qualified GPs, real availability, seamless booking technology. But users weren’t booking. They’d download, explore briefly, then disappear. The brief was to find out why, and what would actually get people to book their first appointment.

01
Trust scored 1 out of 10. Users saw “alarmist colours,” “a templated shell,” and no evidence they could actually rely on what they were seeing.
02
After onboarding, users landed in an unfiltered doctor directory. No guidance. No curation. Pure overwhelm when they needed direction most.
03
The app demanded personal health data upfront, before proving it understood why someone was even there. Trust was being asked for, not earned.
The process

Five sessions. Thirteen games. Six weeks. Every assumption tested.

We put numbers on what the team sensed but couldn’t articulate. Trust at 1/10. Anxiety at 5/10. Confusion at 4/10. Each session built on the last, using proven frameworks to surface what users actually needed versus what the product was delivering. No opinions. No assumptions. Just structured discovery that revealed the gap between working technology and trusted experience.

Core PrinciplesThe Heartbreak Scale™75 min
DiscoveryThe Aspiration Gap™60 min
DiscoveryDay One / Day 90™30 min
Brand PersonalityThe Dinner Party™15 min
Brand PersonalityThe Rejection Letter™30 min
Brand PersonalityThe Funeral Speech™60 min
Tone & CopyThe Voice Sort™40 min
Tone & CopyRead It Aloud™30 min
Tone & CopyThe Word Sort™20 min
Design PrinciplesDesign Principles Builder™60 min
Design PrinciplesThe Moment Test™45 min
Visual DirectionMoodboard Speed Dating™15 min
Visual DirectionOpposite Ends™10 min
The sessions produced strategy documents, complete product designs, and technical recommendations. Everything needed to build a product people would actually use.
Output 01: Strategy & Research

From emotional baseline to voice principles. Nine documents that changed everything.

The Heartbreak Scale revealed why users abandoned the app: anxiety at 5/10, trust at 1/10, confusion at 4/10. The Aspiration Gap mapped the emotional distance between arriving worried about health and feeling confident enough to book. The Dinner Party surfaced who Harley needed to be. The Voice Sort separated what the brand would say from what it would never say. Each document built understanding that shaped every design decision that followed.

The Feel Factor<sup>®</sup>
Feel Factor

The Feel Factor®

Our proprietary framework applied to Harley. Baseline emotional scores across five dimensions, then target scores every design decision was measured against.

Trust scored 1/10. Users saw “visual credibility issues,” “alarmist colours,” and “a templated shell with no personality.” No trust markers anywhere.
Anxiety dominated at 5/10. Not just healthcare nerves, but anxiety amplified by design choices: negative colours, no guidance, confusing next steps.
The gap between current and target state became the brief for everything that followed.
Download document →
The Aspiration Gap™
Discovery

The Aspiration Gap™

The emotional journey from anxious arrival to confident booking. Maps the three critical moments where users either commit or abandon.

Users arrive asking “Will I be OK? Can I trust these doctors? Can I afford this?” The product must answer these before asking anything back.
Critical moment: when users feel guided by a managed product, not presented with a directory. This wasn’t happening. Users got dropped into doctor lists with zero direction.
Biggest risk: broken trust. If users question the platform’s security or review integrity, everything else becomes irrelevant.
Download document →
Brand Personality
Brand

Brand Personality

Who Meditech is, what it refuses to be, and how the personality shows up at every touchpoint.

Five personality dimensions rooted in session evidence: Confidently Understated, A Guide Before a Directory, Transparent by Default, Calmly Human, Listens Before it Speaks.
The Dinner Party revealed someone who notices need but asks permission before helping. The distinction shaped every design and copy decision.
Voice principle: a knowledgeable friend, not a doctor’s receptionist. Authority without stiffness. Short sentences for action, longer ones for reassurance.
Download document →
Plus 6 more documents in the full engagement
04
Discovery & Strategy
Research & Insights Report
24 pages
05
Brand
Tone & Copy
18 pages
06
Brand
Copy Handbook
22 pages
07
Brand
Visual Direction
16 pages
08
Design
Design Principles
13 pages
09
Design
Interaction Principles
28 pages
Output 02: The Design

Production ready screens. Every decision traceable to session findings.

We didn’t give concepts. We designed the actual product. Every screen built directly on what the sessions revealed. Where we redesigned an existing product, drag to compare.

Original
WAA
Output 03: Technology

Native iOS and Android. Every technical decision explained.

Most healthcare platforms choose React Native or Flutter for speed. The sessions revealed that development speed and user trust aren’t the same thing. React Native’s JavaScript bridge creates latency during booking flows. Healthcare apps can’t afford performance compromises that might be acceptable elsewhere. Harley’s architecture prioritises user confidence: native iOS (Swift/SwiftUI) and Android (Kotlin/Compose), Node.js backend, PostgreSQL preventing booking conflicts, Auth0 for security without custom infrastructure.

Technical Blueprint
Technical

Technical Blueprint

Screen inventory, API contracts, data models, notification architecture. Defines what gets built, not how systems connect. Unambiguous specification, not interpretable brief.

Progressive disclosure built into screen architecture. Five levels defined: Essential, Contextual, Detailed, Advanced, Emergency. Home screen shows one question. Results show three options. Choice only appears when explicitly requested.
Copy specified at blueprint level. “You’re booked with Dr Patel. Tuesday 14:00. 12 Harley Street.” Not reference numbers. Prevents developer copy from undermining voice work.
Performance targets tied to emotional insights. Doctor search under 400ms because the moment users realise help exists determines everything. System delays reinforce arrival anxiety.
Download document →
Developer Handoff
Delivery

Developer Handoff

Everything development teams need to begin build. Design files, annotations, interaction states, edge cases, and decisions behind them.

Every screen state documented: empty, loading, error, success. No interpretation required. No assumptions carried forward from brief.
Component annotations reference strategy directly. Where design decisions trace to session findings, annotations explain why. Build teams understand purpose, not just requirements.
Interaction principles written as engineering specifications. Transition timing, gesture behaviour, accessibility requirements defined at implementation level.
Download document →
Plus 4 more documents in the full engagement
Technical
Tech Stack Recommendations
25 pages
Technical
Technical Architecture
32 pages
Delivery
Implementation Roadmap
19 pages
Delivery
Build Cost Reference Guide
6 pages
The result

A product built for users who actually arrive, not users we wish existed.

Three structural problems resolved before any screen was designed. Complete designs built on corrected understanding. Technical specification reflecting user emotional reality, not default developer assumptions. For the first time, every decision had a reason the team could articulate and defend.

The brief rewrote itself
Three foundational assumptions Harley was built on got reversed through session evidence. The product direction changed significantly, not because we imposed our view, but because the team could finally see what users were actually experiencing.
Complete designs, not concepts
Harley got a full set of production ready screens designed by us, every decision traceable to strategy. Nothing decided on taste. Everything explainable and defensible because the thinking was done properly first.
Development teams had everything needed
Build teams received design files, strategy documents, and technical specification defining architecture, stack, and feature scope. They knew what they were building, how it should feel, and which trade-offs weren’t acceptable.
Trust became buildable
The version that went into build was designed for users who arrive struggling with health anxiety and NHS frustration, not idealised users who don’t exist. That gap, caught before any code was written, makes the difference between retention and quiet abandonment.