Overview & Problem
Travel planning that misses the point of travelling
Adventurous travellers don't want another itinerary stuffed with tourist traps. They want the food locals actually eat, the neighbourhoods locals actually live in, and the stories you only hear from someone who calls a place home — but today's planning tools optimise for bookings, not for culture.
Hosted is a culture-focused itinerary planning app that pairs travellers with a local host, so an entire trip can be designed around real, lived experience rather than a search engine's idea of "top things to do."
Tools: Figma, Adobe XD, InVision, Miro
Research
Listening before designing
I started with a single research question — How can we make travel planning easier? — and three objectives: understand what inspires people to travel, how they choose and plan trips, and where the planning process actually breaks down.
From there I built a proto-persona, ran user interviews, and synthesised the conversations into an affinity diagram, an empathy map, and a refined user persona.
Competitive Analysis
What the existing players actually solve for
I evaluated five major travel apps across four jobs travellers care about: itinerary planning, activities, food & restaurants, and lodging. The pattern was loud and consistent — every app could book a hotel or surface a generic "things to do" list, but none of them designed for cultural authenticity. Activities defaulted to tourist attractions, food defaulted to a Google search, and the human element was missing entirely.
Definition & Ideation
The crossroads — and the insight I almost missed
My first user insight pointed at efficiency: young travellers wanted all their planning tools in one spot. It was true, but it wasn't the interesting truth. A round of follow-up interviews changed the direction of the entire project.
"Tourist activities are often overpriced and the food or experiences are not as good as they could have been." — Shiloh
"They're not as culturally centered — the places are interrupted as opposed to what they're meant to be." — Brittany
Both participants said the same thing in different words: they currently figure out culture by asking locals once they arrive. That reframed the problem entirely.
Final user insight
Young adventurous travellers don't discover culture through planning tools — they discover it by talking to locals after they land. They want that authenticity built into the trip before they leave, not left to chance once they arrive.
Problem statement
How might we give adventurous travellers access to local cultural knowledge before they arrive, so their entire itinerary is built around real lived experience rather than algorithmic "top 10" lists?
Value proposition
Hosted pairs every traveller with a local host who designs a culture-first itinerary — so you experience a destination the way locals actually live it, not the way search engines sell it.
Prototyping
From user flow to clickable prototype
With the problem reframed, I mapped a user scenario and storyboard, then worked from task flow → user flow → final user flow, focusing especially on the onboarding experience where travellers tell Hosted who they are and what they're looking for in a culture.
Testing & Iteration
Guerilla testing the onboarding
I ran guerilla usability tests focused on two objectives: could users complete onboarding, and could they add hobbies, destinations, and dislikes from the home screen?
- All participants completed onboarding and added destinations, hobbies, and dislikes.
- The drop-down menus caused some confusion and were simplified.
- "Dislikes" felt off-putting as a label and was rephrased.
- Users expected the "+" button to open a pop-up; behaviour was changed to match.
Takeaways
What I'd carry into the next project
- Iterate on the insight, not just the UI. The shift from "planning is hard" to "culture is missing" was the single most valuable move in the project.
- Test low-fi, early. Usability problems surfaced on paper and lo-fi screens are cheap to fix and expensive to ignore.
- Spend the time where it changes the design. If I did it again I'd compress the competitive analysis and use that time for one more round of prototype iteration.