User testing opportunities were limited in this project. Two sessions were conducted internally with Thomson Reuters accountants, and one session involved a real user. All tests took place once the product was already fully developed, which influenced both the scope of feedback and the type of changes that could realistically be introduced.

Earlier in the process, I had encouraged incorporating user validation during the ideation phase, but constraints around timing and delivery meant that testing happened later than ideal. Even so, these sessions provided valuable insights.

The main issues we uncovered were related to terminology. Some of the concepts we had introduced were not immediately clear to users, with “Current values” standing out as the most confusing. To better understand alternative mental models, I proposed follow-up interviews and card sorting sessions to explore clearer wording options. While those activities could not be scheduled, we addressed the issue by keeping the term and reinforcing its meaning through contextual explanations and the FAQ.

This phase reinforced the importance of early validation and showed how even small language decisions can significantly impact usability.