This is the first in a series of blogs which describe our efforts towards building an effective in-app GRM for India’s UPI users
To discover whether users experience any difficulties while obtaining redress for their UPI-related grievances, we undertook a field study of some leading UPI applications with users who were low-income and new to digital finance. The objective was to understand users’ lived experiences of grievance redressal in UPI and additionally to contextualise these experiences within the landscape of grievance redress offerings –in UPI apps through an expert app-review.
The field study was done through 18 qualitative and exploratory interviews across Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Telangana in October 2023. We recruited participants who had experienced UPI-related grievances in the past but may or may not have formally interacted with the complaint submission mechanism on the UPI app. All participants were frequent UPI users working in the informal sector, such as street vendors, small traders, tea shop owners, gig workers, and migrant workers; and had annual incomes less than INR 500,000. They ranged from low digital proficiency (who use smartphones for basic digital tasks such as messaging and making payments) to high digital proficiency users (who use their devices for more complex tasks such as online shopping). In these interviews, users were asked to describe their grievance redress journey corresponding to the interface of their UPI apps. In cases where users had no experience with the grievance redress journey, they were asked to attempt one for the first time. In both cases, we observed how users identify, understand, and cope with issues that arise along the grievance redress journey. The objectives of this study were both evaluative (anchored to the context of features of the product) and generative (generating insights with no preconceived hypothesis that we went in to validate). Accordingly, we identified their usage patterns, thought processes, preferences, and expectations through their grievance redress journey on UPI apps. We believe that any stakeholder interested in understanding the mental models of a constrained user cohort and designing UX to improve their experience will find these insights valuable. In this blog post, we lay out the headline findings from this field study, by each stage of the redressal journey.
Stage 1: Triggers for the redressal journey
The most commonly occurring issues that trigger UPI users to pursue grievance resolution are transaction failures due to technical issues. Repeated failed transactions detract from the overall UPI user experience and cause great inconvenience for some users. Users may change their payment behaviours to adapt to the risks of failure.
“I have faced several transaction failures, which has led me to question the reliability of the UPI app. Now, whenever I go to the market to purchase anything, I carry some cash with me as a backup in case the transactions fail.” – Male, Anand District (Gujarat)
“I tried to send money to my brother, but the amount was deducted from my account, but it was not credited to my brother’s account. I arranged Rs. 12,000 from others and sent it to my brother again, as there was an urgent need. I did this because if my brother had not received the money, everyone would have thought I deliberately did not send him the money. I would have lost trust.” -Male, Nalgonda District (Telangana)
Stage 2: Discovering & accessing channels for redressal
Many low-digital proficiency users first seek information on how to resolve an issue outside of the UPI app and its inbuilt grievance support. They approach friends and family, customer support helplines, bank staff, or online sources to learn more about the issue and how to resolve it. They may perceive these channels to be quicker than if they were waiting for a resolution from the in-app GRM. Only a few users are able to access the in-app GRMs with ease via the profile icon.
“I saw the “Contact Page” (chatbot interface), but I didn’t understand how to move forward from this screen. Then I thought I would visit the bank branch for complaint.” – Female, Anand District (Gujarat)
Stage 3: Grievance Submission
Users find it difficult to understand the methods for submitting their grievances to the application. A few users anticipated a ‘complaint’ option on the home screen, which was not present. Some apps also prompt individuals to ‘contact’ the support teams. This sets high expectations, as users now tend to anticipate direct contact with the customer support teams – either through chat or a phone call. However, users are disappointed to encounter a chatbot with limited options. Users appear to be unclear about the functionality of the chatbot and lacked an understanding that the chatbot is a channel for submitting complaints. Many apps have predefined categories for users to select from before they can lodge a grievance. These categories may not accurately capture the user’s specific issue and users may find it difficult to comprehend problem categories or feel that their grievance does not fit into the provided categories. For instance, users had some difficulty in understanding some category labels such as ‘Referral issues’, ‘Other Issues’.
“I think that in ‘Others’ category in [Third-party app], I can find information about the complaints raised by me.” – Male, Sitapur District (Uttar Pradesh)
“I thought if I click on ‘issues with pending payments’ my pending payment will be shown to proceed with complaint submission.” – Male, Nalgonda District (Telangana)
“If I am not able to find the correct option, I will talk to customer care” – Female, Nalgonda District (Telangana)
Stage 4: Grievance Redressal Follow-Up
Users find it difficult to discover and access sections of the user interface which contain follow-up information on the grievance. Most were unable to check the status of their complaints in the app. Some stated that they did not receive notifications regarding updates on their complaint status (even if apps may have been providing them) and expressed a preference for the same. Users’ impressions could be due to a lack of clear communication or visibility of these updates within the apps.
As users are not able to discover the status of tickets, and apps usually do not have a landing screen with the status of tickets raised, users interpret this as a lack of transparency from the service provider. Users also do not know the approximate Turn Around Time (TAT) for resolution of tickets, which increases their level of anxiety around the urgency required to avoid potential loss and the lack of knowledge and control over the raised ticket.
Overall, most users could not understand complaint tracking features available in the GRMs in their UPI apps.
“I don’t know how to check the status of the complaint.” – Male, Anand District (Gujarat)
“I don’t know what a ticket is and what this page is about”. – Female, Nalgonda District (Telangana)
Stage 5: Grievance Redressal
There is a significant gap between the communication provided by the apps and the users’ perception of it. Despite the apps sending notifications about the resolution of submitted grievances, most users reported not receiving any other form of communication from the GRM. This discrepancy may be attributed to limited digital proficiency and reading skills. It is also possible that when many notifications come on their phones, users may ignore them, or they may not be able to comprehend or recollect correctly.
Users are also unsure about how to verify whether their issue was marked as ‘resolved’ within the GRMs of their UPI apps. Users will often check their bank balance rather than the app to determine status of resolution.
Based on these discoveries, we undertook an exercise that aims to improve upon the existing in-app GRMs provided by UPI apps. This entailed re-designing prototypes of the UPI in-app GRM experience to bring alignment between user expectations and the user experience.
The next post in this series describes the prototypes in detail.
