Monetising the Confirmation page
Balancing business goals with customers’ resentment towards ads.
Background
What is Rokt?
Rokt is an ecommerce technology company that runs ads and offers on the checkout pages of Ticketmaster, Uber, Domino’s and others. These ads are carefully selected so that they’re relevant to the customer.
Customers get ads after a purchase
On the confirmation page, every time a customer clicks on an ad, the website/app earns revenue from that advertiser.

That means every transaction is an opportunity to earn revenue from ads. On the biggest US retail stores, this can reach $300k+ in a single day.
Event Cinemas
Domino’s
Afterpay
Problem
Ad revenue from the core product wasn’t improving.
Rokt’s core product helps companies earn revenue from showing ads on their websites or apps.

Let’s say Domino’s gets an extra 10c for showing ads on every pizza order. That means for every 100k orders, Domino’s is generating an extra $10k in profit. That extra 10c per order is what we call
revenue per transaction (RPT) and it’s one indicator for how effective Rokt’s ads are.

While revenue increased overall as we partnered with more and more companies, the product saw little to no improvements to RPT over the last few years. Our goal was to increase RPT significantly.
Ad revenue was increasing, but not because of the product
My Role
I joined the team created specifically to tackle this problem in Apr 2023 and worked on this project for 2 months while supporting other team initiatives led by a Lead Designer.

I was responsible for improving the ad placements on 15 of our largest partners including Gap, Pizza Hut and Ticketmaster.

I worked with a Product Manager and the respective Account Managers of the partners.
Buying my first ever concert ticket and seeing a Rokt ad. Exhilarating.
Solution
Customers didn’t trust the offers, so we refined how the ads looked on the sites.
Research Findings
From user testing, I observed people going through a purchase and seeing the Rokt ads. This gave us qualitative customer sentiments around our ads and helped us better understand why engagement rates were low.

We found that people didn’t trust the offers. Some said:
–
“It reminds me of those scams” – F21
– “It went to another
spammy feeling thing...it just feels off” – M31
– “The way that it’s formatted...
it looks different...had a weird font to it” – M23

It wasn’t always negative. Some people found them to be relevant:
– “Get free coupons? I need that” – M41
– “If it helps me find deals I’m down” – F25

Conclusion: how the ads
looked shouldn’t get in the way of the content.
What I Did
Due to these findings, I was responsible for improving the ad placements on 15 of our largest partners. By large I mean VERY large – the volume of transactions on these US and Australian websites ranged from 7 million a year to 50+ million a year.

Here is what I did.
Audit top 15 partners’ sites
From the research findings, we understood that matching the placement to the site’s branding was important for trust.

Since most of our transaction volume came from our largest sites, we focused on them.
Design improvements
At the time of the project, we weren’t able to make changes to the layouts of the ads. We were only able to change styling (fonts, colors, spacing).

Still, I found 14 of the 15 ad placements could match their websites closer so I made those improvements to each.
Test and implement
Some ad placements required more noticeable changes. Because these websites get huge numbers of orders everyday, we had to make any design changes we made wouldn’t impact ad revenue.

So we ran A/B experiments on two partners – Western Union and Gap.

We made improvements to 6 other partners. The rest didn’t get approval from the clients or were deprioritised.
Teach good design
I created training material for the Sales team, Account Managers and Operations team to ensure any ad placements created for new partners in the future were well designed.
Outcome
Matching the ads closer to the site increased RPT by 5%.
Results
Due to the design improvements we made to the ads, we saw an increase in revenue per transaction (RPT) by 5%.

Even though the changes weren’t massive, the experiment results showed a significant impact to engagement and revenue.
– For Western Union, +13% RPT improvement saw them earn $80k more the next month
– For Gap, +11% RPT improvement saw them earn $65k more the next month
reflection
Balancing business and user needs is really hard when you work with ads.
The Voice of the Customer
If we listened to what people say, mostly along the lines of “I hate ads. Get rid of them please.” and did exactly as they said they wanted, we’d be out of business pretty quickly.

What I’ve learned over the last 3 years at Rokt is that ads are pretty inevitable and you’ll always have people saying they hate them. That doesn’t mean there aren’t improvements we can make to people’s experience though.

It just means as a Designer we need to reframe our thinking to: “how do we make this ad helpful to customers?”.
Business needs ≠ User needs
Over countless experiments we’ve run, one obstacle we’ve always run into is that often the prettier, less dark pattern-y ad placement does worse – it generates less revenue.

Because of this, Rokt and Rokt’s partners aren’t willing to change the placement, even if most people in the room would agree it’s a better design from a customer’s pov.

This was a good lesson that the “better” design might not always be best, and that design often doesn’t win – we just have to work with that and keep testing.