Wenju Design

PRODUCT DESIGN / FINTECH / TABLET / 2024

Designing a seamless point-of-sale system for uServe.

Project overview

uServe is a POS system developed by uP to replace third-party prebuilt systems. The goal was to create a proprietary platform that aligned with the company’s new branding while addressing the specific needs of small businesses. The new system streamlines workflows, improves usability, and delivers a more cohesive experience for merchants.

My role

As the lead designer for the uServe project, I drove the end-to-end design process, from initial research to developer handoff. I worked closely with product managers, designers, sales teams, and developers to create a system that aligned with both brand and business goals.

Trusted by 3,100+ restaurant owners and facilitating $2.8B in transactions, uServe’s prebuilt POS had key limitations.

The problems

For over a decade, uServe relied on third-party prebuilt POS systems. While these systems helped support small businesses, they also caused friction in daily operations. The generic interfaces didn’t align with the uP brand or accommodate the unique workflows of small restaurants, making order management and transactions inefficient. To improve the product experience, uServe needed an intuitive system tailored to its merchants.

Since uServe previously relied on a third-party POS system, the goal of this redesign wasn’t to replicate every feature, but to rebuild the most critical workflows.

USER RESEARCH

Learning about the merchants through sales data.

To better understand uServe’s merchant base, we collaborated with sales teams to analyze data of 3,100+ merchants. This analysis provided key insights into our users and shed light on their unique challenges.

01. Minority-owned businesses often face language barriers.

uServe’s merchants are diverse small business owners, primarily from full-service and quick-service restaurants, with 72% speaking Chinese and Cantonese as their first languages and 18% speaking Vietnamese. This data highlights the importance of a system that addresses language barriers and accessibility.

02. uServe merchants put efficiency as their main priority.

uServe’s merchants are scattered across the country, with the majority concentrated in metropolitan areas like New York City, Irvine, Houston, and Chicago, offering diverse cuisines and convenient dining.

Unlike experience-based dining, these restaurants rely on fast turnover and affordable menu items. Every second counts in their workflow, making efficiency not just a convenience but a necessity to stay competitive and profitable. Even the customers expect speed. Whether it’s getting seated, placing an order, or picking up food, delays can quickly lead to loss of business.

Onsite user research in NYC.

Once we had an overall understanding of the merchants, we conducted onsite user research to gain firsthand insights from restaurant owners, managers, and staff. We used a mix of quantitative and qualitative research methods to gain a comprehensive understanding of areas for improvement. The onsite UX research took place in New York, where over 50% of uServe merchants are located.

The goal of the user research was to discover the complexities and pain points that staff experience when using the prebuilt POS system.

User interviews gave us a starting point, but systematic observation of how they use the POS application to serve customers gave us a quantitative insights into usability bottlenecks. To go a level deeper, we worked alongside servers and cashiers in a participatory research design. While having lunch with them we learn the challenges they face beyond POS usability.

How UX pain points emerge in uServe restaurant POS.

By mapping real-life experience of staff interacting with the system, we identified where the system slowed down workflows and pinpointed opportunities for improvement.

Extra taps to modify an order, unclear status tracking, or hard-to-find actions can quickly add up to create stress and frustration for staff. These friction points often go unnoticed during the design phase but become major obstacles when staff are juggling multiple tasks at once.

Comparative analysis of restaurant POS user flows.

We benchmarked the user experience of other restaurant POS and found that major systems like Square and Toast follow similar workflows, with selecting a table from the floor plan as the first step when placing a dine-in order.

While this approach works for many restaurants, uServe merchants often operate in high-turnover environments where speed and flexibility are crucial. Orders may need to be placed before seating is finalized, and in some cases, assigning a table isn’t even necessary. To accommodate these scenarios, we decided that table selection should be optional rather than a required first step for uServe.

DESIGN FOCUS

The redesign focused on order creation and management.

Based on user research, we decided to prioritize on redesigning the order creation and management experience, the steps where staff spend the most time and where we observed the most frustrations.

To make sure the design directly addresses real user needs, we concluded two problem statements to guide design decisions.

DESIGN CRITIQUE

Evaluating the previous design.

In addition to user feedback, our design team performed design critiques to identify usability, visual hierarchy, and navigation issues in the previous system.

WIREFRAMING

Creating 80+ wireframes

SOLUTIONS

We added more informative visual cues, such as icons, to improve accessibility.

Icons in a POS system aren’t just visual elements. They play a functional role in reducing cognitive load and speeding up interactions. uServe primarily uses Material Design icons, but certain POS-specific actions, like voiding or merging orders, weren’t covered. To fill this gap, we designed additional icons that follow Material Design standards.

By placing icons alongside text, we create clear focal points to help staff quickly process key information, making navigation and actions more intuitive in fast-paced restaurant environments.

Decluttering the interface by reorganizing actions and using colors more intentionally.

The old system lacked visual hierarchy, with an overload of colors and action buttons competing for attention. Staff had to exit back to the home page every time they wanted to access different sections of the system. This added unnecessary steps and disrupted workflow efficiency.

Functions like placing orders, recalling past transactions, managing gift cards, and accessing the back office served entirely different purposes but weren’t clearly distinguished. Through iterative prototyping, we refined sidebar-based persistent navigation, allowing staff to switch between sections like Orders, Dashboard, and Back Office without losing their place.

The new design uses color with intent, reinforcing associations and minimizing cognitive load.

Making order type selection the first step of creating an order.

In many restaurants, the same item can be priced differently depending on whether it’s for dine-in or takeout. Since most uServe merchants handle both order types at once, staff frequently switch between menus with different pricing and item availability.

To streamline this process, order type selection is now the first step of creating an order. By choosing the menu upfront, staff immediately access the correct pricing and items, reducing errors and cognitive load.

For dine-in orders, staff can either assign a table immediately or proceed without one using a pop-up selection, ensuring flexibility for different workflows.

Making order creation more intuitive with a clear, receipt-style layout.

After observing staff using the POS, we found that placing an order is a critical step where speed and accuracy directly impact workflow and customer experience.

To streamline this process, we designed the order summary panel with a modular receipt-style layout, ensuring that key details like items, quantities, prices, discounts, and totals are clearly displayed. This approach reduces visual clutter, making the interface more intuitive and minimizing cognitive load for staff.

Keeping primary actions clear, secondary actions accessible.

Users often struggled to find actions like voiding an order or applying discounts. By grouping these less frequently used actions under a dedicated Actions tab, we keep the Check tab clean while ensuring staff can still access important functions quickly when needed.

Clear icons accompany each action, helping staff understand their function without relying solely on text.

Displaying orders in list or card view to support different workflows.

Card views are generally used in kitchen display systems (KDS) to streamline food preparation for kitchen staff, but we decided to integrate them into the front-of-house POS to improve order management for staff handling multiple active orders. With the new design, staff can toggle between list and card views, choosing the format that best suits their workflow.

While list view provides a high-level overview for quickly scanning order IDs and totals, card view offers a more structured layout that highlights key details like items and prices at a glance. This makes it particularly useful for front-of-house staff who need to manage multiple orders while assisting customers. Instead of tapping into each order repeatedly, they can instantly see essential information, reducing actions and improving efficiency.

USER TESTING

Feedback from usability tests inspired several design refinements.

To evaluate how intuitive the order creation and management flow felt to users, we conducted think-aloud usability tests with 10 restaurant staff. The goal was to uncover moments of confusion, hesitation, or inefficiency that may not be obvious through design reviews alone.

Testing scenarios included

Starting a new dine-in order and optionally assigning a table
Adding and modifying menu items
Sending the order to the kitchen
Tracking its progress
Completing payment and closing the order

Key insights

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

01. Skipping table assignment felt unfamiliar

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

While most participants appreciated being able to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” To address possible confusion, we iterated on the order creation popup window.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Tested design

Refined design

This iteration added more verbal and visual cues to inform users that (1) table selection is not required for order creation and (2) a table can be assigned without opening up the floor plan.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

02. Menu categories lacked visual distinction

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

A manager mentioned that he would prefer different colors for different categories. He shared that at his previous restaurant, they used distinct colors to represent each category. Over time, he found that the color associations made it faster and easier to navigate the menu. This insight inspired several rounds of iteration to improve menu navigation and category recognition.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

After testing out 3 versions of menu categories, we finalized on the last version that fills each category with a distinct color.

There was initial hesitation between the second and third versions. While the 2nd design offered better WCAG contrast compliance by only using colored sidebars, it still relied heavily on text to distinguish between categories. During testing, several staff expressed their preference for the third version. Ultimately, we chose the last version to prioritize clarity and speed over strict contrast rules, with the option for merchants to adjust color settings to fit their individual needs.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

03. Order progress indicators created unnecessary complexity

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

One of the new features introduced in the redesign was a set of order status indicators—quick one-tap buttons that let staff update the status of each order. The goal was to provide more visibility into where an order stood in the workflow, from kitchen to front-of-house.

The initial version mirrored the full backend process and introduced four stages: Placed → Cooking → Ready → Served. The introduction of order status indication and updates received positive feedback from staff. However, during testing, we found that this level of detail created more confusion than clarity. Staff shared that too many update steps felt excessive for their fast-paced environments. In response, we simplified the flow.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

We found that for many uServe merchants who operate small restaurants without a kitchen display system, the differentiation between "Placed" and "Cooking" was not practically useful.

The refined version now uses just three clear stages: In Progress → Ready → Served. As soon as an order is placed, it becomes “In progress,” regardless of when cooking starts. This change reflects uServe merchants' workflows more accurately.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

Users mentioned that

Skipping the table assignment felt unfamiliar
While most participants appreciated the ability to skip assigning a table, one participant expressed concern: “I thought I had to pick a table first. Isn’t that required?” This feedback confirmed the need for better visual cues or guidance to reassure users that table assignment is optional.
Terminology mismatches
Words like “Complete” and “Close” caused hesitation or second-guessing. One cashier asked, “Does ‘Complete’ mean it’s ready or it’s paid?” These insights led to clearer button labeling in future iterations. Participants paused when they saw terms like “Send” and “Complete,” unsure of what would happen next. One server asked, “Does send mean print the order? Or does it go to the kitchen?” These moments of hesitation revealed how important clear UX writing is, especially for multilingual users.
Switchable order views appreciated
When toggling between the list view and card view on the Order Management page, one participant immediately noted: “I like this—it depends on what I’m doing.” Another added that the card view made it easier to recognize active orders during rush hours. This validated our decision to offer both options for different workflows.

REFLECTION

Designing for the realities of everyday workflows.

Redesigning uServe’s POS system was an exercise in empathy. By spending time in restaurants and watching staff handling multiple orders, we gained a deeper understanding of how small design decisions ripple across an entire workflow.

Focusing on order creation and management allowed us to make meaningful improvements where they matter most. We removed unnecessary steps, simplified complex flows, and designed with flexibility for different operating styles. And while there’s still more to build, this first phase sets a strong foundation for a POS system that supports real people, not just processes.