The document introduces a new feature called the Nextdoor Speaker Series that aims to increase in-person interaction and user engagement on the Nextdoor platform. Research found that hosts would be willing to invite speakers to their homes if they were interested in the topic and speaker quality. However, hosts worried about not breaking even on costs if attendees did not show up. The solution was to change it to a crowdfunding model where guests could fund events in advance, minimizing risks for hosts. User feedback validated this approach helped create a more neighborly solution.

1. NXTDOOR
INTRODUCING TH NW PAKR RI
PROJCT COP
WORK AOUT CONTACT

2. Nextdoor is a private social network for neighorhoods that strives to uild stronger and safer
communities  connecting people. Our three person team had two weeks to design a new
feature called the Nextdoor peaker eries.
MY ROL
Research, Ideation, Wireframing, Interaction Design
CHALLNG
INCRA IN-PRON INTRACTION AND UR NGAGMNT
Instead of activel interacting with their neighors, Nextdoor users were using the service to
passivel monitor alerts in the neighorhood for safet concerns and used goods. The
peaker eries was proposed  Nextdoor as a platform for motivated communit memers
to open their home to host talks  speakers like authors, artists, musicians, and politicians.
The success of the platform rests on whether hosts are willing to accept the sustantial risk of
paing for the speaker fees upfront without an guarantee that guests will purchase tickets to
recoup their costs.

3.
OLUTION
CROWDFUNDD NIGHORHOOD VNT
Our solution connects a speaker, the host of the event, and neighors to the event 
crowdfunding:
The speaker would set a price efore committing to an event
The potential host would review the event to see how man neighors are interested
 amount of funding
The guests would view the event details and fund the event as an indicator of interest.
Crowdfunding minimizes the risk for the host and allows all parties to evaluate interest
contemporaneousl efore making a commitment. As an added onus, if the event's funding
doesn't meet the speaker's price, the event will e cancelled and guests refunded.
PROC

4. PROC
RARCH
To get started, our team wanted to full understand the people that would e using Nextdoor’s
peaker eries. Memers of our team rarel host or attend man neighorhood events so the
information gathering stage was critical to dispel an ias assumptions aout our users. During
our research phase, we discovered that our product rief for Nextdoor was also given to our
other General Asseml UX class. Our team decided that we could pool oth our
teams' resources and collaorate during the surve process to reach a greater audience. This
also allowed us to create surves that catered to specific use cases. Our team’s focus was the
host’s ehavior while the other team's was directed to towards the guests.
xample questions for hosts:
Wh would the e interested in
hosting speakers?
What would prevent them from having
people in their homes?
What services the currentl use to plan
event?
xample questions for guests:
How do the currentl find events?
The amount that the’re willing to pa?
Information the would find useful during event discover?

5.
FINDING
Host Insights
Research showed that hosts would
invite people into their homes
primaril ecause the’re interested
in the speaker’s topic and the qualit
of the speaker. The main pain point
for hosts was surrounding the guest
RVP process. People would RVP
ut not attend. Hosts would
purchase extra food and drinks that went to waste, and with vacant seats that could have gone
to other guests. Guests would rarel inform the host in advance of their change in attendance
which lead to host feeling unsuccessful.
Guest Insights
Guests were most concerned aout their safet. Going into a stranger’s home can e
precarious and anthing that could relieve that stress would e welcome. Guests wanted to
spend limited time finding and paing for the event. The also wanted to e ale to find more
ackground information aout the host and speaker. An assumption that m team and I were
mistaken aout was that price would e a deciding factor for guests, ut the surves indicated

6. that it was not as important in comparison to getting to know their neighors and learning aout
a new topic.
After our surves, we sat down with people that hosted and attended local neighorhood
events to conduct user interviews to dig deeper. A repeated concern that kept appearing was
that hosts were worried aout reaking even on their investment. The were expected to pa a
lump sum upfront without an guarantee that people would actuall show up. An issue that we
also had considered ut we did not have an eas solution to address it. This was especiall
disturing ecause we discovered that if hosts failed to reak even in their hosting fees, then
the would not choose to return to the use the event hosting service again.
Guest User Flow that addresses user needs for Information, afet, and fficienc
DIGN ITRATION
We compiled our findings and placed them among the different stages of the journe: planning,
set-up, attending and follow up. We listed the different pain points for each stage and our
solutions for addressing them. From there we started working on our screens and a prototpe
to receive user feedack. The response was confusion over the service’s function and having
the hosts pa up front was a strike against the service.

7.
Availale vents vent Page peaker Profile Ticket Pricing Page
ven though the feedack tended to e predominantl negative, a ke insight was shared
during our usailit tests. A user proposed changing the platform into a crowdfunding solution.
As we further evaluated the merits of this idea, we realized that this would solve the main
issues that we were having. Unfortunatel our team ran out of time efore we could make the
adjustments and make our presentations. However, after the assignment I redesigned our
entire platform to reflect this idea. This time, when I gathered feedack, it had a much more
positive reception. This change transformed the entire energ around the platform to e a
more friendl neighorl solution that tended to get people much more excited aout the
service.
FINAL DIGN

8. PAKR RI
INTRODUCTION
VNT LITING VNT PAG
ATTND
CONTRIUTION PAG
HOT-PAKR
COMMUNICATION
PAG

9. prev / nextack to Work
WHAT I LARND
Gather feedack earl and often.
We waited too long as a team to gather feedack from our users. This forced us to
stick with a design we weren't entirel satisfied with. We had great ideas from
usailit testing ut ecause we didn't allocate our time efficientl, we weren't ale to
implement them.
Rememer to flexile
I realized how eas it is to convince ourself to continue with our original train of
thought, even if other ideas are presented. When in dout, it's critical go ack to
our research and question our ongoing assumptions. It's never too late to explore
other options and ideas, even if the're not implemented right wa.

10. IGCOMMRC NXTDOOR
RACK-IT