Monobank
Solving key usability issues in a Ukrainian banking app’s new eSIM feature
year
2023
Category
UX Bootcamp case (real client)
Problem
Monobank had a great idea: let users buy eSIM mobile plans directly in their banking app. Fast, convenient, fully digital. But the actual experience? Confusing. Users didn’t know the feature existed, menus were hard to navigate, and the whole experience lacked clarity or trust.
The feature had been quietly launched, but wasn’t gaining traction. Our brief wasn’t just to design a screen or tweak the UI. The big question from stakeholders was:
“Will users even use this?”
We needed to understand what stood in the way of adoption, and whether Monobank could actually become a mobile service provider people would trust.
Problem
Monobank had a great idea: let users buy eSIM mobile plans directly in their banking app. Fast, convenient, fully digital. But the actual experience? Confusing. Users didn’t know the feature existed, menus were hard to navigate, and the whole experience lacked clarity or trust.
The feature had been quietly launched, but wasn’t gaining traction. Our brief wasn’t just to design a screen or tweak the UI. The big question from stakeholders was:
“Will users even use this?”
We needed to understand what stood in the way of adoption, and whether Monobank could actually become a mobile service provider people would trust.
Problem
Monobank had a great idea: let users buy eSIM mobile plans directly in their banking app. Fast, convenient, fully digital. But the actual experience? Confusing. Users didn’t know the feature existed, menus were hard to navigate, and the whole experience lacked clarity or trust.
The feature had been quietly launched, but wasn’t gaining traction. Our brief wasn’t just to design a screen or tweak the UI. The big question from stakeholders was:
“Will users even use this?”
We needed to understand what stood in the way of adoption, and whether Monobank could actually become a mobile service provider people would trust.
My role
I was part of a team of five UX designers. We worked closely together across all stages: rom research to concepting to delivery. I contributed to:
Running user interviews and surveys
Building proto-personas and journey maps
Facilitating ideation sessions and mapping solutions
Designing and iterating low- and mid-fidelity concepts
Co-presenting the final UX direction to stakeholders
Our final output wasn’t meant to be a polished Figma prototype. It was meant to be clarity — a research-driven view of user needs, product gaps, and design opportunities.
My role
I was part of a team of five UX designers. We worked closely together across all stages: rom research to concepting to delivery. I contributed to:
Running user interviews and surveys
Building proto-personas and journey maps
Facilitating ideation sessions and mapping solutions
Designing and iterating low- and mid-fidelity concepts
Co-presenting the final UX direction to stakeholders
Our final output wasn’t meant to be a polished Figma prototype. It was meant to be clarity — a research-driven view of user needs, product gaps, and design opportunities.
My role
I was part of a team of five UX designers. We worked closely together across all stages: rom research to concepting to delivery. I contributed to:
Running user interviews and surveys
Building proto-personas and journey maps
Facilitating ideation sessions and mapping solutions
Designing and iterating low- and mid-fidelity concepts
Co-presenting the final UX direction to stakeholders
Our final output wasn’t meant to be a polished Figma prototype. It was meant to be clarity — a research-driven view of user needs, product gaps, and design opportunities.
Kick-off
We started with a session with the Monobank team. Their input helped frame our problem space:
Users weren’t engaging with the feature
There was confusion around why Monobank was offering eSIMs at all
Business stakeholders weren’t aligned on whether the feature was worth further investing in
Key questions remained unanswered:
Why would users buy from Monobank over mobile operators?
Would they trust a bank with their mobile connectivity?
Would auto-top-up features feel safe or risky?
Kick-off
We started with a session with the Monobank team. Their input helped frame our problem space:
Users weren’t engaging with the feature
There was confusion around why Monobank was offering eSIMs at all
Business stakeholders weren’t aligned on whether the feature was worth further investing in
Key questions remained unanswered:
Why would users buy from Monobank over mobile operators?
Would they trust a bank with their mobile connectivity?
Would auto-top-up features feel safe or risky?
Kick-off
We started with a session with the Monobank team. Their input helped frame our problem space:
Users weren’t engaging with the feature
There was confusion around why Monobank was offering eSIMs at all
Business stakeholders weren’t aligned on whether the feature was worth further investing in
Key questions remained unanswered:
Why would users buy from Monobank over mobile operators?
Would they trust a bank with their mobile connectivity?
Would auto-top-up features feel safe or risky?
Discovery frameworks
We focused on understanding the ecosystem of needs, behaviours, and blockers. Our process included:
Lean Canvas to map business goals, risks, and assumptions
Value Proposition Canvas to pinpoint where value might sit for users
AARRR Metrics Board to identify levers across acquisition, activation, retention, etc.
SWOT Analysis of Monobank’s positioning in the telco space
Competitor Analysis of how eSIMs are presented elsewhere
Discovery frameworks
We focused on understanding the ecosystem of needs, behaviours, and blockers. Our process included:
Lean Canvas to map business goals, risks, and assumptions
Value Proposition Canvas to pinpoint where value might sit for users
AARRR Metrics Board to identify levers across acquisition, activation, retention, etc.
SWOT Analysis of Monobank’s positioning in the telco space
Competitor Analysis of how eSIMs are presented elsewhere
Discovery frameworks
We focused on understanding the ecosystem of needs, behaviours, and blockers. Our process included:
Lean Canvas to map business goals, risks, and assumptions
Value Proposition Canvas to pinpoint where value might sit for users
AARRR Metrics Board to identify levers across acquisition, activation, retention, etc.
SWOT Analysis of Monobank’s positioning in the telco space
Competitor Analysis of how eSIMs are presented elsewhere
User research
We used a mix of user research, and mapping exercises to get clarity on what really mattered for the user.
Proto-personas → personas. We started with assumptions and evolved them into real people based on interviews.
Surveys & in-depth interviews, as we needed numbers and stories.
Refined the problem space: Synthesised findings into focused UX problem statements
Value proposition canvas to anchor to user needs
Customer Journey Maps to spot key friction points across different contexts
Feature prioritisation: Used MoSCoW method (Must, Should, Could, Won’t) to clarify the most critical problems to solve
User research
We used a mix of user research, and mapping exercises to get clarity on what really mattered for the user.
Proto-personas → personas. We started with assumptions and evolved them into real people based on interviews.
Surveys & in-depth interviews, as we needed numbers and stories.
Refined the problem space: Synthesised findings into focused UX problem statements
Value proposition canvas to anchor to user needs
Customer Journey Maps to spot key friction points across different contexts
Feature prioritisation: Used MoSCoW method (Must, Should, Could, Won’t) to clarify the most critical problems to solve
User research
We used a mix of user research, and mapping exercises to get clarity on what really mattered for the user.
Proto-personas → personas. We started with assumptions and evolved them into real people based on interviews.
Surveys & in-depth interviews, as we needed numbers and stories.
Refined the problem space: Synthesised findings into focused UX problem statements
Value proposition canvas to anchor to user needs
Customer Journey Maps to spot key friction points across different contexts
Feature prioritisation: Used MoSCoW method (Must, Should, Could, Won’t) to clarify the most critical problems to solve
34
34
34
Respondents
In-depth interviews
In-depth interviews
44
44
44
Respondents
Respondents
Surveys
Surveys
15
15
15
Participants
Participants
Usability testing
Usability testing
Key findings
Users saw clear value in the eSIM feature, especially for travel convenience. They trusted Monobank as their digital bank and were open to letting it manage their mobile numbers too. But many simply didn’t know the feature existed or where to find it. The second biggest friction point was confidence. People wanted reassurance: would it work with their device? Would setup be simple? Clarity and upfront expectations proved essential to building trust and improving engagement.
Key findings
Users saw clear value in the eSIM feature, especially for travel convenience. They trusted Monobank as their digital bank and were open to letting it manage their mobile numbers too. But many simply didn’t know the feature existed or where to find it. The second biggest friction point was confidence. People wanted reassurance: would it work with their device? Would setup be simple? Clarity and upfront expectations proved essential to building trust and improving engagement.
Key findings
Users saw clear value in the eSIM feature, especially for travel convenience. They trusted Monobank as their digital bank and were open to letting it manage their mobile numbers too. But many simply didn’t know the feature existed or where to find it. The second biggest friction point was confidence. People wanted reassurance: would it work with their device? Would setup be simple? Clarity and upfront expectations proved essential to building trust and improving engagement.
Problem 1: Choosing the Right Plan Was Too Hard
Problem: Most users (65%) were planning to use eSIMs abroad, but but the interface didn’t let them search by country or region. This made it hard to compare plans or even know which one applied.
Solution: We added location-based filtering inside the purchase flow, so users could easily type a country and instantly see relevant eSIM plans.
Problem 1: Choosing the Right Plan Was Too Hard
Problem: Most users (65%) were planning to use eSIMs abroad, but but the interface didn’t let them search by country or region. This made it hard to compare plans or even know which one applied.
Solution: We added location-based filtering inside the purchase flow, so users could easily type a country and instantly see relevant eSIM plans.
Problem 1: Choosing the Right Plan Was Too Hard
Problem: Most users (65%) were planning to use eSIMs abroad, but but the interface didn’t let them search by country or region. This made it hard to compare plans or even know which one applied.
Solution: We added location-based filtering inside the purchase flow, so users could easily type a country and instantly see relevant eSIM plans.
Prototypes & Feedback
We tested early flows with users to confirm:
Discoverability had improved
Search logic met real-world expectations
Transfer steps reduced drop-off and confusion
We handed our concepts off to Monobank’s internal design team. Monobank has since updated their eSIM feature to include several of the improvements we focused on such as: search by country and more transparent plan details. It’s always good to see research translate into impact.
Prototypes & Feedback
We tested early flows with users to confirm:
Discoverability had improved
Search logic met real-world expectations
Transfer steps reduced drop-off and confusion
We handed our concepts off to Monobank’s internal design team. Monobank has since updated their eSIM feature to include several of the improvements we focused on such as: search by country and more transparent plan details. It’s always good to see research translate into impact.
Prototypes & Feedback
We tested early flows with users to confirm:
Discoverability had improved
Search logic met real-world expectations
Transfer steps reduced drop-off and confusion
We handed our concepts off to Monobank’s internal design team. Monobank has since updated their eSIM feature to include several of the improvements we focused on such as: search by country and more transparent plan details. It’s always good to see research translate into impact.
What i learned
This project reminded me that when you’re designing for ambiguity (new product, unsure market fit), the most valuable output is clarity.
We didn’t rush to wireframes.
We didn’t assume the business knew what problem we were solving.
We let the insights guide the solution, not the other way around.
And that’s what made this project real UX work.
What i learned
This project reminded me that when you’re designing for ambiguity (new product, unsure market fit), the most valuable output is clarity.
We didn’t rush to wireframes.
We didn’t assume the business knew what problem we were solving.
We let the insights guide the solution, not the other way around.
And that’s what made this project real UX work.
What i learned
This project reminded me that when you’re designing for ambiguity (new product, unsure market fit), the most valuable output is clarity.
We didn’t rush to wireframes.
We didn’t assume the business knew what problem we were solving.
We let the insights guide the solution, not the other way around.
And that’s what made this project real UX work.