Business Financing: Optimizing Products for SMBs
As the lead researcher, I set out to understand how small businesses manage cash flow gaps caused by delayed payments — and whether financing unpaid invoices could be a practical solution.
Through generative research, usability testing, and A/B testing, I uncovered key friction points and opportunities that shaped the product experience. The work led to a 17% reduction in customer churn and supported a successful launch, generating over $4 million in annual revenue.
Jump to:
BILL Overview | Problem Statement | Methods | Insights | Recommendations | Impact | Lessons Learned
What Does BILL Do?
BILL is a financial automation platform that helps small and midsize businesses (SMBs) manage their payables, receivables, and overall cash flow. By streamlining core financial operations, BILL enables businesses to save time, stay organized, and make smarter financial decisions.
As the lead researcher for the Invoice Financing product, I conducted foundational research to understand how SMBs manage delayed payments and short-term cash flow needs. I was also responsible for usability testing and prototype validation, working closely with product managers, designers, engineers, and go-to-market teams to guide early product development and improve the customer experience.
Why Was This Research Needed?
As BILL explored new ways to support small businesses, the team identified a common pain point: SMBs were often stuck waiting weeks or months to get paid after sending invoices. These delays created cash flow gaps that made it difficult to cover expenses or invest in growth.
While invoice financing seemed like a promising solution, the product team needed a clearer understanding of how SMBs perceived short-term borrowing, what their ideal financing experience looked like, and whether such a product would truly meet their needs.
To guide product direction and reduce uncertainty, we explored:
How do SMBs manage day-to-day operations while waiting for payments?
What trade-offs are they willing to make when borrowing against unpaid invoices?
What makes a financing product feel trustworthy and easy to use?
How well does our prototype align with SMB expectations and existing financial behaviors?
How I Approached the Research?
To understand how small businesses handle delayed payments and whether invoice financing would be valuable, I followed a staged research approach—from early exploration to real-world testing.
Stakeholder alignment
I first worked with BILL’s credit and data teams to define the predicted target segment based on borrowing patterns and cash flow needs. This ensured we were speaking to the right audience from the start.
In-depth interviews
I conducted interviews with 5 participants from the identified segment to learn how SMBs manage cash flow when clients delay payments, how they evaluate lending options, and their comfort with borrowing against unpaid invoices.
Usability testing
Using early prototypes, I ran moderated usability sessions with 8 participants to uncover confusion points, unmet expectations, and areas where the product needed clearer value communication.
A/B testing
To validate interface and messaging improvements, I designed A/B tests that compared different flows and content variations. These tests provided quantitative evidence on what resonated best and helped fine-tune the product before launch.
Collaboration
This research was closely integrated with the product, credit, design, and go-to-market teams—ensuring that feedback was immediately actionable and aligned with both user needs and business goals.
Story in the Numbers: Interviews
Story in the Numbers: Usability
What Needed to Be Done Next?
Based on usability issues and broader customer pain points, I recommended changes to simplify the experience, build trust, and support adoption:
Design for Sole Proprietors and Micro-Businesses
Recommended shaping the product around the needs of sole proprietors and micro-businesses — especially those navigating unpredictable income and short-term cash flow gaps
Clarify Repayment Ownership
This was a critical misunderstanding that directly impacted trust and adoption. I recommended rewording loan terms to clearly state that customers—not their clients—are responsible for repayment.
Offer Flexible Repayment Options
Participants wanted control over repayment terms — shorter for small loans, longer for larger ones. I recommended offering multiple durations instead of defaulting to 11 months.
Build Trust in the Bank Linking Step
Several users were unfamiliar with Plaid and felt uneasy connecting their bank accounts. I recommended integrating a short explanation upfront to increase transparency and reinforce trust in the verification process.
Improve Labeling of Key Elements
Update confusing terms like “Authorized Signer,” “Add as a Owner,” and “Available Credit” with clearer, more intuitive language to reduce user hesitation and errors.
Bring Loan Details Front and Center
Several users missed the “How does it work” section. I recommended repositioning key product information earlier in the flow and surfacing FAQs or visual cues to increase visibility.
How Did This Shape the Product?
The research helped shape foundational decisions for launching BILL’s Invoice Financing product, from product direction to rollout strategy. Rather than treating it as a standalone credit feature, this work helped position it as a cash flow tool designed to meet the borrowing behaviors and repayment needs of sole proprietors and micro-businesses.
Here’s how it influenced strategy and the roadmap:
It led to a quant study and modeling initiative to identify behavioral signals and customer traits predictive of product suitability — informing future segmentation and updates to credit and data models.
It led to the exploration of flexible repayment durations, moving away from a fixed 11-month plan toward options better aligned with business needs.
It sparked roadmap planning around supporting multiple active loans, a behavior users expressed interest in that the original product had not accounted for.
It surfaced internal product overlap risks, prompting discussions on where this product fit within BILL’s broader ecosystem to avoid cannibalization.
What I Learned?
Designing for money means designing for stress.
Financial tools often create more anxiety than relief. Confusion about repayment, verification, or wording wasn’t just UX friction — it reflected deeper uncertainty. This taught me to listen for hesitation, not just answers.
People don’t always know what they need — but you can feel when something’s off.
Some of the strongest signals came from pauses, hesitation, or skipped steps. I learned to pay attention to what isn’t said, and design with those quiet cues in mind.
If something doesn’t feel fair, it rarely feels usable.
Worries about who repays or sharing bank info weren’t just product issues — they were trust issues. This helped me understand how perceived fairness shapes comfort and decision-making.
Research isn’t just about friction — it’s about emotion underneath.
This project reminded me to go beyond flow and function. Every decision users made came with emotion behind it — and that’s where the real story was.