In‑System Navigation and Task Flow

## Epic: Navigation and Task Flow

**8 participants tested, March 2026**

### Summary
User testing shows that once inside the system, navigation friction and missing
information repeatedly disrupt task flow. Participants consistently stalled when
labels were unclear, steps were missing, or choices lacked explanation. When the
system failed to guide them, users searched externally or called support.

**Dependency:** Sequenced after Epic: System Understanding and Onboarding.
Orientation must be established before navigation friction can be meaningfully reduced.

**Outcome:** Users can move through the system without getting stuck or leaving
to find help.

---

### User Story: See how many steps remain
**Confidence:** High | **Support Risk:** Med

As a migrating user
I want to see how many steps remain
So I know how close I am to done

#### Notes
- Participants were unsure where they were in the process
- Missing step information caused hesitation and second-guessing
- "It does not say which step we are on or how many steps there are"
- Confidence increased when the next step was obvious

#### Evidence
2 participants explicitly said they couldn't tell how many steps were left or
where they were in the process. The research report flags it as a wider pattern
across the group.
*(Research report Slides 16–17; BCR 003, 007)*

#### Actions
- [ ] Add clearer progress indicators or step context
- [ ] Ensure users always know what comes next
- [ ] Validate that users can tell how close they are to completion

---

### User Story: Understand decision points
**Confidence:** High | **Support Risk:** High

As a business owner
I want clear choices and explanations
So I can choose the right option

#### Notes
- Participants stalled when choices lacked explanation
- Ambiguous labels and missing context disrupted confidence at key decision points
- Clear labels enabled quicker decisions; simple language reduced hesitation

#### Evidence
6 out of 8 participants stalled or expressed uncertainty at decision points
during the session.
*(Research report Slides 17–18; BCR 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 007)*

#### Actions
- [ ] Review labels at all decision points
- [ ] Add brief context where choices are presented
- [ ] Test whether users can choose without pausing

---

### User Story: Find help where I need it
**Confidence:** High | **Support Risk:** High

As a user
I want help available during the task
So I do not leave the system or call support

#### Notes
- When confused, participants searched externally (Google — "not helpful at the
moment") or called BC Registries directly
- A guide existed within the system but was nearly impossible to find
- "If I don't have all the answers in the email I received, I might contact BC
Registries"

#### Evidence
7 out of 8 participants could not find the help guide during the session. Only
one participant found it, and they happened upon it rather than searching for it.
This was directly observed by the research team in every session.
*(Research report Slide 17; BCR 001, 002, 004, 005, 007, 008; directly observed)*

#### Actions
- [ ] Surface help content at points of confusion
- [ ] Cross-link guidance throughout the journey
- [ ] Remove reliance on users searching externally
- [ ] Confirm guidance is discoverable during the task