Under reviewMorrow Commerce

Checkout Renewal

Product Manager · 2025.03–2025.09

Why did it start?

Mobile checkout abandonment was high, and customer inquiries repeatedly pointed to friction across the four-step input flow.

View evidence

H1 2025 performance review.pdf

Page 4 · Major projects

High confidence
“Led problem framing and cross-functional decisions for the checkout funnel improvement”

What did you own?

Owned product decisions from problem framing and experiment design through design–engineering alignment and launch validation.

View evidence

Project notes.txt

Lines 18–22

Medium confidence
“Aligned on an alternative flow with 2 designers, 5 engineers, and legal”

Project story

How this project unfolded

Rebuilt from 8 sources

  1. 2025.03

    START2 proof items

    Defined checkout abandonment as a core problem

    Reviewed funnel data with 126 customer inquiries to narrow down the main drop-off points.

  2. 2025.04

    DECISION3 proof items

    Chose to test step reduction first

    Tested reducing four steps to two before committing to a full redesign.

  3. 2025.06

    TURNING POINT2 proof items

    Found a flow that kept legal requirements intact

    Reframed mandatory notices inline and avoided delaying the launch.

  4. 2025.09

    RESULT1 proof items

    Released the new checkout flow to all users

    The launch is confirmed, but conversion and completion-time metrics are still missing.

Evidence

Sources behind this story

Original files are visible only to you

H1 2025 performance review.pdf

Page 4 · Major projects

High confidence
“Led problem framing and cross-functional decisions for the checkout funnel improvement”

Checkout 2.0 retrospective.pptx

Slide 12

High confidence
“4-step checkout → 2-step checkout”

Project notes.txt

Lines 18–22

Medium confidence
“Aligned on an alternative flow with 2 designers, 5 engineers, and legal”