Event Registration
Eventgroove was built as ticketing software, but a key enterprise client needed robust registration capabilities to continue their partnership. They manage hundreds of small events and 5-6 large multi-day events annually, each with complex registration requirements that our platform couldn’t support. Without this feature, we risked losing significant business.
My Role: Lead Product Designer | Team: 1 Developer | Timeline: 60-day sprint
Research & Discovery
Understanding the Problem: I started by defining what differentiated ticketing from registration—where they overlapped and where they diverged. This foundational research shaped our entire approach.
Customer Collaboration: Conducted in-depth interviews with our at-risk client to document their specific needs. Our customer success team’s field observations from their events provided crucial context about real-world usage patterns. I compiled requirements into a comprehensive framework.
Competitive Analysis: Evaluated how other event management platforms handled registration. The key strategic decision: should we collect attendee data first or session data first? After consulting with our customer, we chose an attendee-first approach to match their workflow.
User Flow Development: Used AI to analyze research data and developed comprehensive user flows in Figma. Identified four distinct registration scenarios (registering yourself, someone else, on behalf of a group, or mixed) and created two separate workflows to handle all cases.
Key Design Decisions
Prioritization Framework: With a 60-day deadline, the developer and I categorized features as launch-critical vs. Phase 2, balancing customer needs with technical feasibility.
Key UX Solutions:
Event Dictionary – Created flexible terminology system allowing hosts to customize CTAs (“Buy Tickets” vs. “Register”) based on event type, acknowledging that ticketing and registration contexts use different language.
Two-Step Event Pages – Redesigned information architecture: Page 1 for event details, Page 2 for all actionable elements. This accommodated registration’s complexity while keeping CTAs accessible even in multi-component scenarios.
Configuration Approach – Recognized that registration is essentially an umbrella housing multiple components (tickets, venues, add-ons). Ideally, I’d build a drag-and-drop visual editor for complex events, but time constraints required leveraging existing UI—we integrated registration configuration into our current accordion system.
Order Editing – Designed self-service editing tool (previously unavailable), crucial for registration workflows where attendees often need to modify details.
Guest Information Flow – Addressed email communication complexity: designed flows ensuring correct guest details even when someone else purchased their registration, required before issuing official tickets.
Results & Impact
Customer Retention: Client confirmed the initial build met their needs—securing continued partnership.
Validation & Expansion: Demoed for 6 additional enterprise customers; received overwhelmingly positive feedback with constructive input for Phase 2.
Development Velocity: Shipped complex feature in 60 days through strategic scoping and collaborative design-development process.
What I Learned
Customer involvement transforms outcomes: Having direct access to the client who needed this feature was invaluable. Their insights shaped better design decisions than we could have made in isolation.
If I could do it again: I would have conducted more extensive usability testing with the broader customer base before launch. While our at-risk client validated the approach, testing with the 6 customers we eventually demoed for during the design phase would have caught potential issues earlier and reduced Phase 2 work. I would love to implement that visual canvas editor, though the accordion approach got us to market quickly and validated the concept.









