Order of space creation steps inconsistent

[nadonomy]

Your use case

When creating a public space, we ask users to set up their first rooms, and then share.

When creating a private space, we ask users to share/invite, and then set up their first rooms.

We should have clarity on why.

Did we want to front-load sharing? Should we invert for consistency? Is it advantageous in cognitive load to set up rooms first so you know what you're inviting someone to/we can use richer metadata on invite?

Have you considered any alternatives?

No response

Additional context

No response

[niquewoodhouse]

These steps are as designed by previous designers. In earlier testing with @t3chguy, we noticed they're in different orders but chose not to change as we weren't sure if there were valid reasons.

I can't see anything in any notes about reasons why so can't speak to clarity as to why it's that way round.

I can only assume it's this way around because it's supposed to flow more naturally as the next step :

• Q to the user:"is this space for you or a team?"
  • if "A: team" next question is "Ok, who are your teammates"?

Should we invert for consistency?

I think changing it could be good but that would then be inconsistent with Android, which followed the original web designs and we currently don't have the capacity for changing Android flow. Are we ok with that @vector-im/product ?

[t3chguy]

we currently don't have the capacity for changing Android flow

I can probably wrangle together enough Kotlin to swap that flow around :D

[daniellekirkwood]

Great - Let's go ahead and swap the ordering.

I can see why we went with: "I work with a team" > "Who are your teammates" but as it's only 3 questions it's not too much of an ask of our users to go "I work with a team" > Create rooms > "Who are your teammates".

We could use copy to bridge the gap if we're worried about it? Something like, "I work with a team" > "Cool, we'll ask you about them next, first let's create some rooms..."

@niquewoodhouse would you like to update the copy, or should we just go ahead and change the order?

[niquewoodhouse]

@daniellekirkwood Id suggest updating the copy on the create rooms step to be:

What projects are your team working on? instead of What projects are you working on? it refers to the team but doesn't require a lot of additional copy. I do personally think the original copy is ok though (if we can't easily alter the copy if the user selected teams on the previous step).

Original

Altered

[daniellekirkwood]

@t3chguy Can we have the copy in the headline different dependant on the previous click (without too much impact/time to build?) If so, let's go ahead and implement this approach! Thanks

[t3chguy]

Can we have the copy in the headline different dependant on the previous click (without too much impact/time to build?) If so, let's go ahead and implement this approach! Thanks

Yes, but Just me and Me and my teammates don't share any later steps in the Wizard

Just me -> Add existing rooms -> done
Me and my teammates -> Create new rooms -> Invite teammates -> done

so not following where the variety is

[niquewoodhouse]

@t3chguy I think that's my fault, making it seem like there was a need for variety in an earlier comment.

I should probably know these flows by now...