AH107 - How Good UX/UI Design Transforms Healthcare, with Adam Murphy and Michelle Chambers

Lightly edited for clarity.

‍

[00:22] Justin Venneri: Hello, and thank you for listening to another episode of the Astonishing Healthcare Podcast. This is Justin Venneri, your host and Senior Director of Communications at Judi® (Judi) Health. Today, we’re going to talk about a niche topic that really impacts almost everyone. If you’ve ever used a platform or an app and thought, “I don’t love this experience,” or, “Why does it take so many clicks to do this or that?” that’s why we’re here today, to shed some light on what goes on behind the scenes and the importance of good design. With me in the studio today are Adam Murphy, Senior Director of Design, and Michelle Chambers, Director of UX/UI here at Judi Health. Before we get into it, welcome to the show, Adam and Michelle.

‍

[00:58] Adam Murphy: Thanks, Justin. Really excited to be here.

‍

[01:00] Michelle Chambers: Thank you for having us. Very excited.

‍

[01:02] Justin Venneri: Likewise. I’m looking forward to this discussion and learning more about what you do and how we do it. To frame things up, Adam, as Senior Director of Design here at Judi Health, tell us a bit about your background and your path to Judi Health.

‍

[01:14] Adam Murphy: Sure. I’ve been here a little over four years. Prior to my time at Judi Health, I was at Accenture leading their design practice out of the Houston Innovation Hub, where we were serving Fortune 100 clients, a lot of oil industry, insurance, and other high-touch, high-complexity, regulated industries. That was a nice pathway into the healthcare space. Prior to that, I owned my own business for about 12 years, doing everything from graphic design to motion graphics, which was the majority of my business, as well as illustration, print, website design, and mobile app design. It was a broad experience, which gave me a strong platform to move into the more enterprise-focused area of our practice.

‍

[01:56] Justin Venneri: Awesome. Michelle, how about you? How’d you get here?

‍

[01:58] Michelle Chambers: Yeah, so I have also been with Judi Health for about four years now. Prior to that, I was already in the healthcare space, but more on the patient-facing side. I worked within the product space of a hospital in my local area in Seattle. Before that, I also owned my own business. I was freelancing, doing a variety of things, all the way from coding websites to graphic design to UI/UX, a lot of different things and a lot of different hats. Before that, I was specifically designing for A/B testing. I did a lot of user research in that space for an online sales funnel. Prior to that, I was a little more visually focused in graphic design, but still mainly on websites, which still played into the UI/UX side.

‍

[02:49] Justin Venneri: Very cool. Well, we’re glad to have you both on the team here and working on this for our platform, our app, and everything else people interact with that we build. Big picture, design in this context, UX, UI, and enterprise software. Adam, you mentioned enterprise. What are we talking about here?

‍

[03:06] Adam Murphy: Yeah, Justin, you mentioned good design in your intro. Something I always say is, design that doesn’t solve a problem is just modern art. A lot of what we want to do in UX for an enterprise software platform is solve design problems. There’s always a user at the other end of the software, right? What we do is craft experiences for them. We help them solve their problems. We meet their needs. Through all of that, we’re not simply trying to design an interface, but using an interface as a vehicle to create a better user experience.

‍

[03:38] Justin Venneri: Just out of curiosity, given your background in entrepreneurship, design, graphics, marketing, user experience, and understanding the seat the user is sitting in, I’m curious, how did you get into this or find out you liked it or could excel at it on the enterprise side?

‍

[03:57] Adam Murphy: It took a long time to get there. Going back to my brief history, I actually struggled in graphic design, not with the ability to do it, but with the ability to enjoy it. I never felt satisfied with it. I think this stems from my youth. I was a problem child. I always made my parents angry. I was the kid who always asked why, and kept asking why, because I was never satisfied with the answer. Now that I’m older and I’ve had a little time to reflect on that, it really boils down to wanting to understand how things work. I want to understand how they operate and why they work the way they do. When we get into the kind of work we do with enterprise software, the complexity, the depth, and the breadth of it all scratch an itch that has been present in my life from a very early age. These are things I’ve always contemplated. It also ties into this mindset around things like perpetual motion machines or Rube Goldberg machines. The complexity there, the things that really can’t be solved, those are the things I want to tackle. The enterprise platform gives me the opportunity to do that in a way that is more achievable and reasonable.

‍

[05:03] Justin Venneri: Michelle, how about you? Do you have anything to add there?

‍

[05:05] Michelle Chambers: Yeah, I’d say I share Adam’s reflection. When I was more visually focused and graphic design-focused, I didn’t have that sense of fulfillment. It wasn’t until later in my career that I took a human-centered design course, which absolutely changed the way I thought about things. It’s just a different frame of thinking that can shift how you think about the way things are designed, both in physical form and within a digital product. When you begin to focus on real-life uses and how people actually interact with something, or on their actual pain points in society, it naturally becomes something beautiful rather than trying to focus on the beauty first. It’s a really different way of thinking, and it completely shaped my career moving forward after taking that course.

‍

[06:03] Justin Venneri: Got it. I love that. So what I’m hearing is UX/UI isn’t really about aesthetics. It’s really about, and I’m going to use some big buzzwords here, reducing cognitive load in high-stakes workflows. Adam, what does that mean when you think about designing what someone is interacting with in health tech?

‍

[06:22] Adam Murphy: Yeah. There’s an old saying that design should be invisible, and it really boils down to things like cognitive load. How much effort is a user putting into accomplishing their task? When we talk about a healthcare enterprise platform like Judi, it is high-stakes, right? We have very specific metrics that we have to meet, things like turnaround time. That’s not necessarily just for prior auth, that’s also for any interaction a user has in our platform. It has to do with error handling. If somebody tries to do something and it doesn’t perform the way they expect, how are you informing them that a field is required, or they used the wrong format, or something like that? How are we communicating that to them so they understand what they need to do next?

‍

Part of what we’re trying to build is trust in the system because, again, we’re talking about complexity, we’re talking about people’s lives, and we’re talking about a lot of money moving through the system. We want our users to trust that our platform is accurate, that it’s doing the job for them, or helping them do the job they need to do successfully. What I like to say is poor UX scales your problem, whereas good UX scales your performance. Bottom line, in consumer apps, bad UX is annoying. In health tech, bad UX is expensive and can sometimes be dangerous.

‍

[07:38] Justin Venneri: Interesting. Okay, and I’m going to go a little off script again. I know I asked you a personal question before. This could be a minute or two depending on your answer or reaction. The reality of UX/UI here versus elsewhere, for enterprise health tech users versus consumer or other applications, because you just explained there is a big difference here. Is the job or role a different vibe here, or in the enterprise health tech space? Or is this type of design experience or role better for people with certain personality types? Does it require a different skill set? Michelle, do you want to take that first?

‍

[08:11] Michelle Chambers: Yeah, it is drastically different, in my opinion, designing within enterprise health tech versus more consumer-facing applications, mainly because of the complexity. I think it’s really important for a great designer to aim to become an expert in the space they’re designing within so they really understand the area they’re trying to solve in and can understand the user problems in that space. In this industry, that learning takes a lot longer. It takes significant time for a designer to really understand this space. We’re often hiring from many different industries. A designer could be coming from almost anywhere. Coming into the health tech space is drastically different, and the enterprise side specifically isn’t necessarily flashy or sexy. It’s quietly transformative.

‍

A lot of our work has downstream effects, and it definitely makes a difference, but it’s less immediate. In consumer-facing applications, you might see immediate effects in how the consumer is buying something or making a purchasing decision. Here, we’re working with expert users who are doing their jobs day to day under sometimes extreme pressure and time restraints. We’re designing a more efficient system for those users. We’re focused on faster decision-making that ultimately leads to a better member experience down the line, like a member’s prior authorization being approved in a timely manner or fewer errors in configuration, and so on. So yes, I do think it’s a different space to be designing in, and I personally find it really challenging, but rewarding. Honestly, I’m still learning something about the industry every day.

‍

[10:03] Justin Venneri: Yeah, same here. I can definitely understand that. Adam, you run the team here, which has been growing, congrats. Anything you’d add?

‍

[10:10] Adam Murphy: Yeah. Michelle, I appreciate you mentioning how we try to find folks who are maybe coming from the same adjacent industry or from within it. We’ve found some really great talent from adjacent or related industries. What I’m really proud of is finding those diamonds that aren’t necessarily in those adjacent industries, and a lot of credit goes to our hiring process. It’s very robust. It’s a difficult process to get through, but it’s critical for finding the right kind of people.

‍

In the past, I was very involved in the initial screenings and the portfolio reviews. We’ve grown to a point now where that’s more distributed, and I get to focus more on culture fit. When I meet people for the first time, I’m looking for whether this is somebody who can join our program and our team as a true teammate, somebody other people can lean on, rely on, and somebody who can come in and have a positive impact on the team. That’s critical once you scale. We can’t have any bad apples in the bunch, basically.

‍

I’m looking for people who always want to improve themselves, people who want to be better tomorrow than they are today. In fact, the design team motto is, “Never perfect, always improving.” I think we try to live that out on a day-to-day basis. We’re constantly looking at our processes, our design system, our design patterns, and how those patterns are implemented in interfaces. Everybody is willing to pivot and adjust and say, “You know what? That’s not as good as it could be. Let’s try harder.” I’m just so proud of everybody who adopts that mentality and helps us become more successful.

‍

There are a couple of other things we say on the team that are a little tongue-in-cheek, but I think they carry a lot of weight. One of them is, “Be less clever.” This is an interesting one because, often, when we’re trying to design a solution, we can go overboard. We add too many steps or too much interactivity. We have to pull it back and ask, how do we cut out the noise to improve the signal? I’m looking for people who are humble, who are willing to say, “My solution may not be the right one. I may have gone overboard, and I can pull that back.” That also means getting feedback from other designers, stakeholders, PMs, tech leads, or even the developers they’re working with. I want people who are willing to say, “I’m not perfect, but I can always improve.”

‍

There’s one other saying we use, and I know this is a little long-winded, but it comes up occasionally when we’re trying to solve really complex problems and we keep piling things in. I give credit to one of our design managers, Katie Lema. She says, “Clarity is only valuable if there’s confusion.” Again, this is a point of self-reflection. Maybe that’s really the point I’m trying to make in all of this. Do we have people who can reflect and ask, is what I’m doing the best thing for what we’re trying to achieve? Are they willing to pivot because they’ve realized that by letting go of their preconceived notions, we can find a better solution? That all rolls up into what we’re trying to achieve, a better user experience for our users.

‍

[13:17] Justin Venneri: So we’ve got thoughtful team members who are humble, and we’ve got expert users operating under pressure, not casual app users. But then we also have plan members using a portal or an app. Adam, sticking with you, tell us a bit about the key differences.

‍

[13:31] Adam Murphy: Yeah, so this is where we pivot more into B2C versus internal applications. This is also where we get to explore more of the user interface and more graphic styling. It is a totally different experience. We want members to come to our platform and feel like we are a modern technology solution for them, that they’re not living in the Stone Age. It boils down to trust. If somebody is dealing with a healthcare issue and wants to understand what their copay is or what their accumulations are, they may not understand all the technical or healthcare jargon. Are we giving them an experience that eases them into the information they’re looking for, helps them find it, and helps them make a decision about their healthcare plan without technical language, healthcare jargon, or added friction? It’s all the same basic process for us, but we customize and tailor it to the user and the experience we intend for them to have, or that they expect to have.

‍

[14:34] Justin Venneri: Got it. What would be some examples of the use cases or workflows Adam’s describing, where you’re trying to streamline things and make it a better experience?

‍

[14:43] Michelle Chambers: Yeah. Comparatively, on the platform side, we have expert users who may be conducting a clinical review of a prior authorization request. For that type of user, we’re very focused on whether they have all the information they need to make their decision. Then, when they’re ready to make that decision, how efficiently can they do that? How can the system assist them in finding information like the member’s age, diagnosis, and so on?

‍

Over on the member portal or app, how quickly can a member, without friction, find the amount they’ve paid toward their deductible? Or what is their max out-of-pocket? Maybe they forgot because they recently changed plans. Ultimately, both scenarios come down to how quickly people can find the information they need in order to complete a task or make a decision about their plan. It’s definitely a different atmosphere when you compare the member portal and consumer-facing side with the expert user on the backend side.

‍

[15:54] Justin Venneri: Makes sense. Adam, when we were prepping for this, I was thinking a lot about our member care team and how they use Judi to help them perform the tasks they need to as efficiently as they do for our plan members. Can you talk a little bit about how design helps them do that?

‍

[16:09] Adam Murphy: This is a case where time equals money. What we want to provide for our customer care members is the ability to find information quickly so they can inform members as quickly and accurately as possible, so those calls are resolved on the first call, right? That’s critical for our call center. We also want to shorten the amount of time members spend on the phone. Nobody wants to sit on the phone forever. So accuracy is important, time is important, and all of those things feed into the overall experience. User experience isn’t just software. User experience is picking up the phone and calling. User experience is the time it takes to do something. That’s what we’re trying to provide in general, with the software acting as a vehicle toward a better overall experience.

‍

[16:55] Justin Venneri: Okay. And you shared something with me, Adam, that kind of stuck in my mind while we were talking about doing this. “Accuracy is a UX problem.” We’ve brought up accuracy a lot here, along with time, speed, and how that connects to money or outcomes. What does that statement mean in the context of our discussion and what we do?

‍

[17:13] Adam Murphy: So UX affects accuracy through clear affordances. In design, affordances are the perceived and actual possible actions somebody has. If you’ve ever heard of the Norman door, Don Norman wrote a book called The Design of Everyday Things. Once I explain this, I think everybody who hears it will recognize it. When you walk up to a door and it has a bar on it, are you supposed to push that or pull it? That’s the idea of the Norman door. If you don’t give somebody a clear explanation, a clear signal about what the experience is going to be, they don’t know what to do, and they might do the wrong thing. Then you’ve introduced frustration and friction. That creates a mindset with a greater possibility of error.

‍

So when we talk about accuracy and making sure somebody enters the right information, you want to provide wayfinding, proper labeling, and error prevention before the mistake happens, which is a primary driver in many of the decisions we make. You make the right action the easiest one. Justin, this is especially critical in claims processing, clinical decision support, and eligibility and benefits workflows. Some examples might be reducing rework by surfacing missing data before submission and using flags instead of modal interruptions. That modal introduces friction into the process. You’re asking somebody to refocus their attention. Design choices matter. We try to make it as easy as possible for our colleagues, like Julian Lonsen and Gene Beaman, who have been on the podcast talking about benefit design, to do what they do for clients.

‍

[18:46] Justin Venneri: Yeah, the easier we can get everything set up, the faster we can test it, and the more confidence people can have when they go live. So that makes sense. Everything I’m hearing revolves around frictionless workflows and how that helps create cost savings, improved performance, or efficiency. Michelle, I’ll start with you. It’s the last question I ask everyone. What would you say is the most astonishing thing you’ve seen or experienced here related to our discussion? And of course, keep your compliance hat on. What’s something safe to share?

‍

[19:18] Michelle Chambers: Yeah. During my time here at Judi Health, I think the most astonishing thing is truly the speed at which we’re able to release well-thought-out products and features. Often, speed comes with quickly thought-through user experiences. Here, I think we’re still able to put our heads together and create an amazing experience with that speed. I attribute that to all of my colleagues, their skill sets, and their passion for this industry and for making a difference.

‍

I spoke earlier about the differences between consumer-facing apps and the enterprise platform we’re designing within. I mainly want to stress that we are still making a huge difference in this industry, and everyone here is so passionate about that. That isn’t lost in the speed at which we’re releasing things. I think that’s truly astonishing. I’ve never worked with a team that has maintained that level of passion and quality through rapid iteration, and I think that’s incredible here.

‍

That also carries through when new regulations are introduced. This is an industry that is particularly in need of UI/UX help. The products I see clients coming off of and the products they’re coming onto here, it’s astonishing what they were able to do their jobs on before and what they’re moving into now. We’ve built it so quickly and efficiently, and I think that’s astonishing.

‍

[20:56] Justin Venneri: Awesome. Adam, same question to you, final question. Close this out with a good story about UI/UX that may surprise people or be underappreciated, something safe to share.

‍

[21:03] Adam Murphy: Of course, sure. Justin, I don’t know that I have a particular story, but I do have a theme I’d like to cover. What is astonishing to me in healthcare, and here at Judi as well, is the rapid pace of AI implementation and adoption. We have an aging population that is increasingly being asked to trust unfamiliar or previously untrusted technology. We’re seeing things like CMS using AI to identify fraudulent claims. They’re pushing communications toward AI solutions like chatbots and call centers instead of human interaction.

‍

We’re doing similar kinds of things. We’re using AI to help process data, inform decisions, handle inbound and outbound call volume, and standardize messaging, which is great. I think all of those things are good. They reduce operational costs and streamline interaction experiences. But obviously, we want to be cautious because it opens the door to more scams and exploitative opportunities, and we want to be careful about how we introduce this technology into these experiences.

‍

I always think about what the user experience is in this space. I want to say that as AI begins dictating user experience in areas that used to be exclusively human-based, we will have crossed this threshold of the AI revolution, right? While that’s very exciting and signals the transition into a new technological era, we can’t just dump AI on our users. It has to be done with great intention and appropriate safeguards. So all of these things we’ve talked about today, being very intentional about decisions, solving specific problems, and not just throwing technology at an industry, that’s how I think we can be successful with it and achieve amazing things with that added technology. We just need to approach it from the right direction and with the right perspective.

‍

[22:48] Justin Venneri: That’s a great point, Adam. I love that. There’s definitely so much more behind the little error message that pops up when a field is filled out incorrectly, and gaining an appreciation for that has been pretty eye-opening for me, at least. So, Adam and Michelle, thank you both so much for taking the time today. I really enjoyed this discussion, and I look forward to staying in touch and seeing how our products evolve with you both helping lead the design of it.

‍

[23:08] Adam Murphy: Thanks, Justin. Had a great time.

‍

[23:10] Michelle Chambers: Thank you, Justin.

‍