# DIREKT Customer Interview Guide

## Purpose

Understand how people in Zambia currently find, assess, contact and evaluate local service providers, and test whether DIREKT’s proposed trust and location language is understandable.

## Session profile

- Duration: 35–50 minutes
- Format: in person preferred for contextual observation; remote allowed
- Notes: coded participant ID only
- Prototype: synthetic only
- Researcher stance: neutral; do not sell DIREKT

## Before the interview

1. Confirm adult eligibility and consent.
2. Assign a code such as `CUS-LSK-001`.
3. Record only broad area, not exact address.
4. Ask whether the participant recently hired a plumber, electrician, mechanic, builder, cleaner, tailor, repair technician or similar provider.
5. Do not begin by explaining DIREKT’s proposed solution.

## Section A — Recent real journey

Ask about the participant’s most recent relevant service need.

1. What problem were you trying to solve?
2. How urgent was it?
3. How did you first look for someone?
4. Who or what influenced your choice?
5. What information did you want before making contact?
6. What information was difficult to obtain?
7. How did you confirm where the provider was based or whether they served your area?
8. Did you compare more than one provider? Why or why not?
9. How did you contact the provider?
10. What happened after first contact?
11. How did you agree on price, timing and scope?
12. Did you pay a deposit? How?
13. What made you trust or distrust the provider?
14. What went well?
15. What would you change about the process?

Probe for actual behaviour, not ideal behaviour.

## Section B — Trust failures and scams

Use neutral wording and avoid requesting identifying allegations.

1. Have you ever received a false location, false qualification claim, fake business name, changed phone number or misleading profile from a provider?
2. Have you experienced non-arrival, poor work, theft, overcharging, deposit loss or inability to find the provider afterward?
3. What warning signs did you notice, if any?
4. What proof would have helped before contact?
5. Who did you ask for help?
6. Was there a practical way to complain or recover money?
7. What should a platform do—and not claim to do—when something goes wrong?

Record incident patterns only. Do not name alleged offenders.

## Section C — Location behaviour

1. How do you normally describe where you live or where work is needed?
2. Which are most useful: street name, house number, compound, township, landmark, map pin, Plus Code, bus stop, shop or spoken directions?
3. Do map pins usually take people to the correct place?
4. Have you had to call repeatedly to guide someone?
5. Would you share your exact location with a provider before booking? Why?
6. What provider-location information should be public?
7. Is it important to know whether the provider has a workshop/storefront or travels to customers?
8. How far would you consider travelling or paying call-out fees?

Optional task: ask the participant to demonstrate how they would send a location to a fictional provider. Do not save the real coordinate.

## Section D — Concept test: separate verification claims

Present synthetic provider cards in randomized order. Include examples such as:

- phone number confirmed;
- identity document checked;
- business registration found;
- qualification checked with issuing body;
- premises visited by DIREKT;
- check expired;
- check pending;
- document submitted but not independently confirmed;
- customer reviews from tracked enquiries.

For each card ask:

1. What do you think DIREKT checked?
2. What did DIREKT not check?
3. Would you contact this provider? Why?
4. Which claim matters most for this service?
5. What does an expiry date mean to you?
6. Does any wording sound like a safety guarantee?
7. Which information should be visible before contact?
8. What additional explanation is needed?

Comprehension passes only when the participant can accurately describe scope and limitation without researcher correction.

## Section E — Search and profile priorities

Ask the participant to rank or select:

- distance;
- service category;
- price range;
- availability;
- response time;
- identity check;
- qualification check;
- premises check;
- business registration;
- customer reviews;
- years of experience;
- photos of work;
- language;
- payment methods;
- ability to travel;
- emergency service.

Then ask:

1. Which three should appear in search results?
2. Which details belong only on the full profile?
3. Would you use map view, list view or both?
4. What makes a profile feel fake or outdated?
5. How should an unavailable or suspended provider appear?

## Section F — Contact and accountability

1. Would you prefer call, WhatsApp, SMS, in-app message or a structured request?
2. What details should be sent before the provider receives your phone number?
3. Would you use a structured enquiry if it created a complaint or review record?
4. Should the platform know whether the provider replied?
5. Would you return to the app to leave a review?
6. What proof should be required before reviewing?
7. Should providers be allowed to respond to reviews?
8. What complaint outcomes would be realistic?

## Section G — Device, data and accessibility

1. What phone do you normally use for services?
2. Is it shared with anyone?
3. How often do you change SIMs or use more than one SIM?
4. Are data bundles, storage or battery limitations a concern?
5. Do you avoid apps that are large or update frequently?
6. What happens when internet connection is poor?
7. Do you use font enlargement, screen reader, voice notes or another accessibility aid?
8. Which language and terms are easiest for service search?

Record device details only with consent and without device identifiers.

## Section H — Pricing and value

Do not ask only “Would you pay?” Explore trade-offs.

1. Would you expect customer search to be free?
2. Would you pay a small fee for an urgent or premium service? Why?
3. Would a provider paying for visibility reduce your trust?
4. How should sponsored listings be labelled?
5. What would make you stop using DIREKT?

## Closing

1. What is the biggest problem DIREKT should solve?
2. What should DIREKT never claim?
3. What would make you recommend it?
4. May we invite you to test a synthetic prototype later?

## Researcher summary

Immediately after the session record:

- strongest observed need;
- current discovery channel;
- location method;
- trust evidence valued;
- claim-comprehension errors;
- preferred contact channel;
- device/connectivity constraints;
- contradiction with existing assumptions;
- follow-up question;
- no identifying details.