Find out exactly what's broken — and fix the right things first.
Most products don't need a full redesign. They need a rigorous diagnosis of what's actually causing friction, followed by targeted fixes to the specific flows that are losing users. A UX audit combines expert heuristic evaluation with real user observation to produce a ranked list of every significant usability problem in your product, each one explained, evidenced, and assigned a severity. The redesign phase then fixes the highest-impact problems first, using validated changes rather than a complete visual overhaul. The result is measurable improvement on the metrics that matter — without the risk and cost of rebuilding from scratch.
What's included
- Expert heuristic evaluation (Nielsen's 10 principles)
- Moderated usability sessions with real users
- Analytics & session recording interpretation
- Prioritised issue log by severity & frequency
- Redesign of highest-impact flows
- A/B testable improvement recommendations
How we deliver
- 1Heuristic evaluation report
- 2Usability testing sessions (recorded)
- 3Annotated issue log with severity ratings
- 4Opportunity prioritisation map
- 5Redesigned flows for top 3–5 issues
- 6A/B testing plan for improvements
Technologies we use
- Figma
- Maze
- Hotjar
- FullStory
- Lookback
- Google Analytics 4
- Mixpanel
- Optimal Workshop
Why Origin for UX Audit & Redesign
Diagnosis before prescription
We audit before we redesign — every time. Redesigning based on assumed problems is how you end up with a beautiful product that still doesn't convert.
Severity matrix, not a laundry list
Every issue is rated by frequency, impact, and fix effort. You get a prioritised action list, not a list of everything that could theoretically be better.
A/B testable recommendations
We design improvements as testable changes wherever possible. You validate the fix works before rolling it to all users.
Industries we serve
“We thought our sign-up flow was the problem. The audit showed users were confident signing up but lost at the first configuration step. We fixed that one screen and activation went from 34% to 61%.”
Frequently asked questions
- What's the difference between a UX audit and a redesign?
- A UX audit is a diagnosis: it identifies what's wrong, how severe each problem is, and how frequently users encounter it. A redesign is the treatment: it fixes the identified problems. We treat them as sequential phases — audit first, then redesign — so we're fixing problems we've diagnosed, not problems we assumed. Many clients run the audit alone to inform their own team's design priorities.
- How do you prioritise which issues to fix first?
- By a severity matrix: frequency (how often users encounter the problem) × impact (how badly it blocks them) × effort (how hard it is to fix). High-frequency, high-impact problems that are easy to fix go first. We also consider business impact — a checkout problem with a measurable conversion effect ranks above an onboarding problem that affects only 5% of users. The audit report presents every issue ranked on this matrix so you can make an informed prioritisation decision.
- We don't have analytics set up — can you still run an audit?
- Yes. Analytics accelerate the audit and add quantitative evidence, but a heuristic evaluation plus user sessions can produce a thorough issue list without them. If your analytics are sparse, we'll flag that as a finding in its own right — knowing where users drop off is valuable enough to invest in instrumentation before the next redesign cycle.
- How long does a UX audit take?
- Heuristic evaluation: 3–5 days for a product of typical complexity. User sessions: 5–8 participants, 2 weeks to recruit and run. Synthesis and report: 1 week. Total: 3–4 weeks for a comprehensive audit. We can do an express audit (heuristic evaluation only, no user sessions) in 5–7 days if you need findings faster — with the caveat that some issues only surface when real users encounter them.
- Can you redesign without rebuilding? Our tech stack can't easily accommodate large visual changes.
- Yes — this is often the right scope. Many UX improvements don't require visual redesign: changing the order of form fields, improving error messages, adding empty states, adjusting button placement. We scope redesign recommendations to what's achievable within your tech constraints, then flag what would require engineering work separately. Meaningful improvement often comes from changes that look minor in a diff.