Zurich Crop Insurance · AgriSecure
Fields of Innovation:
Revamping the
Crop Insurance Portal
Improving accessibility and usability of the AgriSecure legacy portal with a robust design system — migrating 30 agents and policyholders to a modern UI framework that works everywhere.
01Objectives
A Legacy Portal
Holding Back
Modern Users
The AgriSecure portal had become outdated, cumbersome to use, and unable to meet modern user expectations of agents and policyholders managing crop insurance claims. The goal was a complete migration to a modern UI framework.
OBJECTIVE · 01
Increase Policy & Claims Efficiency
Streamline the end-to-end workflow for policy management and claims processing — reducing the cognitive load and task time for agents filing, reviewing and approving claims daily.
OBJECTIVE · 02
Enhance Accessibility & Mobile Usability
Achieve WCAG Level AA compliance and ensure full mobile usability — many agents access the portal in the field on mobile devices where the legacy interface had critical functionality gaps.
OBJECTIVE · 03
Improve Information Presentation
Redesign the information architecture and visual hierarchy so critical data — claim status, policy details, risk assessments — is immediately scannable and actionable without excess navigation.
02Research & Analysis
Understanding the
Real Pain Points
Interviews with 15 agents and 15 policyholders, combined with task analysis and surveys, surfaced four consistent failure patterns in the legacy portal.
01
User Interviews
Conducted in-depth interviews with 15 insurance agents and 15 policyholders to understand their daily workflows, pain points, and expectations — capturing qualitative insights that survey data alone could not surface.
02
Task Analysis
Observed users performing common tasks — filing claims, updating policy information, checking claim status — to map exactly where interactions broke down and identify the highest-friction steps in each workflow.
03
Surveys
Distributed structured surveys to gather quantitative data on user satisfaction scores and feature usage patterns — providing a statistical baseline to measure post-launch improvement against.
Key Findings
Navigation was Complicated & Unintuitive
Users struggled to locate key functions and frequently took multi-step detours to complete single tasks. Information architecture reflected system logic, not user mental models.
Poor Performance at Peak Times
The portal was significantly slow during high-traffic periods — particularly during claims season — causing agents to abandon tasks mid-flow and reducing overall throughput.
Limited Assistive Technology Support
Accessibility compliance was WCAG Level A at best — making the portal difficult or impossible to use for users relying on screen readers, keyboard navigation, or high-contrast modes.
Mobile Features Were Broken or Missing
Many core features did not function correctly on mobile devices — a critical gap given that field agents frequently needed to access and update claims remotely.
03Challenges
What Made This
Project Hard
Beyond the design work itself, four systemic challenges shaped the project constraints and required careful mitigation strategies throughout.
Challenge 01 · Data
Data Migration IntegrityEnsuring accurate and complete transfer of all data — including policy details, claim histories, agent records, and approval chains — without data loss or corruption during the migration to the new framework.
Challenge 02 · Compatibility
Cross-Device & Cross-Browser CompatibilityEnsuring the new framework worked seamlessly across different devices and browsers — including older enterprise environments where browser version updates lagged.
Challenge 03 · Adoption
User Resistance to ChangeSome long-tenured agents were resistant to changing the familiar legacy interface, even when it was objectively more difficult to use. Managing the emotional transition was as important as the functional one.
Challenge 04 · Transition
Training & Support at ScaleProviding adequate training materials and support to help 30 agents and a broader policyholder base transition smoothly — without creating downtime in claims processing during the active growing season.
04Implementation
Three Phases,
One Rollout
The project followed an Agile methodology across three distinct phases — planning, iterative development, and phased migration — with continuous usability testing woven throughout.
Phase 01 · Planning
Stakeholder Alignment & Roadmap
- Gathered input from business leaders, developers, agents, and policyholders to align on scope and priorities
- Developed a detailed project plan with milestones, sprint definitions, and launch criteria
- Established design system foundations — component library, spacing, colour tokens, accessibility standards
Phase 02 · Development
Iterative Design & Testing
- Used Agile sprints to develop and test UI components iteratively — shipping to a focus group every two weeks
- Conducted regular usability testing sessions with real agents, gathering task completion data and qualitative feedback
- A/B tested key interaction patterns — particularly the claim filing flow — to validate decisions with evidence
Phase 03 · Migration
Pilot Launch & Full Rollout
- Created full data backups before migration; validated integrity across all policy and claims records
- Released the new portal to a small pilot group first — identifying and resolving edge cases before full rollout
- Gradually rolled out to all users with live monitoring, a dedicated support channel, and rollback capability
05Portal Design
Designing the
New AgriSecure
Four design areas were developed and iteratively validated — the claims dashboard, policy management forms, accessibility compliance layer, and the mobile-responsive experience.
Feature 01 · Overview
Claims Dashboard
The redesigned dashboard surfaces the information agents need most — active claim counts, approval pipeline status, and recent activity — in a scannable layout that replaces the legacy portal’s table-heavy, scroll-intensive interface.
- At-a-glance pipeline metrics replace buried report exports
- Colour-coded claim status badges enable instant triage
- Persistent agent identity and session context in the top bar
- Claims list sortable by date, crop type, amount and status
AGRISECURE · CLAIMS DASHBOARD
Active Claims
24
↑ 3 this week
Pending Review
7
Oldest: 4 days
Approved MTD
18
€142k total
Recent Claims
#CR-2024-0841
Winter Wheat · Baden-Württemberg
€28,400
Approved
#CR-2024-0792
Sunflower · Bavaria
€15,200
In Review
#CR-2024-0755
Corn · Rhineland-Palatinate
€9,800
Filed
#CR-2024-0701
Rapeseed · Saxony
€34,100
Denied
Feature 02 · Data Entry
Policy Management Forms
The legacy form system required agents to navigate across multiple pages to complete a single policy update. The redesigned form consolidates related fields into contextual groups with inline validation — reducing completion time by 40%.
- Contextual field grouping replaces flat field lists
- Inline validation with clear error messaging at field level
- Auto-save prevents data loss during longer form sessions
- Conditional fields appear only when contextually relevant
AGRISECURE · FILE NEW CLAIM
New Claim — Policy Details
Policy Number
POL-2024-DE-00841
Policyholder Name
Klaus Hartmann
Crop Type
Winter Wheat
Hectares Affected
142 ha
Loss Description
Hail damage — approx. 60% crop loss observed on 14/06/2024.
Estimated Loss Value
€ 28,400
Incident Date
14 Jun 2024
Submit Claim →
Feature 03 · Accessibility
WCAG AA Compliance Layer
Accessibility was treated as a first-class design requirement from the outset — not retrofitted at the end. The portal moved from WCAG A to full Level AA compliance through systematic audit, remediation, and testing with assistive technology users.
- Colour contrast ratios meet or exceed 4.5:1 for all body text
- Full keyboard navigation with visible, consistent focus rings
- Semantic HTML structure compatible with screen readers
- Error states announced by ARIA live regions, not just visual cues
AGRISECURE · ACCESSIBILITY AUDIT
WCAG 2.1 Compliance — Level AA
✓
Colour contrast — body text (4.8:1)
AA Pass
✓
Keyboard navigation — all interactive elements
AA Pass
✓
ARIA roles and landmarks — semantic structure
AA Pass
✓
Form labels — programmatically associated
AA Pass
✓
Focus indicators — visible and consistent
AA Pass
!
Complex data tables — captions in progress
AA Partial
Feature 04 · Mobile
Field-Ready Mobile Experience
The legacy portal was essentially unusable on mobile. The redesign treated mobile as a primary use case — field agents can now file claims, check policy status, and update records directly from the field on any device.
- Responsive layout adapts seamlessly from desktop to handset
- Touch targets sized to WCAG 2.5.5 minimum (44×44px)
- Core claim actions available within two taps from the home screen
- Offline form drafting with sync on reconnection
AGRISECURE · MOBILE VIEW
Active Policy
POL-2024-841
Winter Wheat · 142 ha · Baden-Württemberg
Latest Claim
#CR-2024-0841
Filed 14 Jun · Hail damage
Approved
Coverage Summary
€180k
Total Cover
€28k
Claimed
File New Claim
View Policy
06Success Metrics
Measurable
Outcomes
Post-migration measurement across four key performance dimensions confirmed significant, sustained improvements in user experience and system performance.
User Satisfaction
88%
Satisfaction rate post-migration — up from 58% in the legacy system. A 30-point lift driven by navigation clarity and task completion confidence.
Efficiency Gain
−40%
Reduction in average task completion time for core claim and policy workflows — achieved through form consolidation, better navigation, and inline validation.
Performance
−50%
Reduction in average page load time — eliminating the primary source of agent frustration during peak claims season and significantly reducing abandoned sessions.
Accessibility
A → AA
WCAG compliance level achieved — improving from the minimum Level A baseline to full Level AA, enabling use with assistive technologies across the user base.
07Continuous Improvement Plan
Beyond Launch:
Staying Current
The project established a structured feedback loop and improvement cadence to ensure the portal continued to evolve alongside user needs and business requirements post-launch.
01 · Updates
Regular Release Cycle
Implementing regular updates and improvements based on aggregated user feedback — prioritised by impact on task completion rates and agent satisfaction scores tracked in post-launch monitoring.
02 · Testing
Quarterly Usability Testing
Conducting quarterly usability tests with a rotating panel of agents and policyholders to identify and address new issues as the system evolves and the user base expands to new regions.
03 · Feedback
Embedded Feedback Loop
Establishing a structured feedback channel with agents and policyholders to continuously gather insights — enabling the team to prioritise improvements against real usage data rather than assumptions.
04 · Support
Ongoing Training & Documentation
Offering ongoing training sessions and continually updating support materials to help users make the most of new and updated features — reducing support ticket volume and accelerating new agent onboarding.
08Learnings as a UX Designer
What This
Project Taught Me
01 · Research
Understand User Needs Deeply
Conducting thorough user research — going beyond what users say to observe what they actually do — is the foundation of any successful redesign. The gap between self-reported behaviour and observed behaviour in this project was significant.
02 · Process
Iterative Design & Testing Compounds
An iterative approach produces compounding returns. Each sprint surfaced issues that were inexpensive to fix in prototype and would have been costly to fix post-launch. The discipline of testing early and often is what made the 40% efficiency gain achievable.
03 · Collaboration
Communication is the Work
Regular, transparent communication with stakeholders and users isn’t separate from the design work — it is the design work. Keeping all parties aligned on trade-offs and decisions prevented late-stage surprises and maintained trust throughout a year-long project.
04 · Adaptability
Flexibility is a Design Skill
Being prepared to adapt plans based on feedback and unforeseen challenges is as important as the initial strategy. Holding designs loosely — while holding principles firmly — allowed the product to evolve toward something genuinely better than the original brief.