# Try a checklist before a new onboarding flow

Fictional teaching example. The team, dates and results are invented.

Decision owner: the PM
Date: 2026-09-01
Status: changed after review
Review on: 2026-09-08

## Call
Test a short checklist alongside the current setup page before building a new flow.

## Evidence
Observed behavior in a fictional usability study on 2026-08-28: three of five participants asked where to find the import setting. Support notes also mention the setting, but we have not counted how often.

## Strongest counter
The setting's label may be the problem. A checklist could add another thing to read without making the page clearer.

## Test and decision rule
Ask six new participants to import the same sample file: three with the current page, three with the checklist beside it. Record unassisted completion and requests for help. Keep the checklist for another test only if all three checklist participants finish without help and fewer than three baseline participants do. Otherwise, remove the checklist from the next prototype and test a clearer label. This rule only chooses the next prototype to test. We accept the risk of discarding a useful checklist because testing a clearer label is a small, reversible next step. Six participants cannot establish a conversion lift.

## Wrong if
Participants can find the setting but fail because their files cannot be imported. Then the import flow needs investigation.

## Review result
On 2026-09-08, two of three checklist participants and two of three baseline participants finished without help. One participant in each group asked what the setting label meant. The checklist missed the prewritten rule. Remove it from the next prototype and test the clearer label. We still do not know whether either change improves real onboarding completion.