Healthcare Provider Portal · Survey Design

Listening at Scale: Rebuilding the Sitewide Provider Experience Survey

Survey Design Quantitative Research Thematic Coding
~20,000 Valid provider responses in the first cycle
37% Ranked Benefits & Eligibility as their #1 improvement priority
2 → 1 Two provider portals, one streamlined instrument
Problem: The legacy provider survey had been triggered so often, per session, that it frustrated providers enough to get disabled entirely, leaving Digital and Line-of-Business partners without the data they needed to justify feature funding.

Outcome: Redesigned it as a role-personalized, bi-annual instrument across both provider portals, explicitly positioned as one input in a broader research stack. The first cycle immediately surfaced a clear, prioritized signal for where the product roadmap should focus next.
Read the full case study

Project Brief

The Digital team inherited ownership of an existing sitewide survey running across two provider portals. That survey had been triggered so frequently, per session, that it frustrated providers, enough that the team disabled it entirely while figuring out how a sitewide instrument could actually serve Digital and Line-of-Business (LOB) partners going forward. At the same time, Digital and LOB stakeholders needed actionable data to justify funding for both net-new features and enhancements, particularly anything that could reduce inbound call volume. I was asked to draft the question set and design principles for a redesigned, far less intrusive version of the survey.

Survey trigger frequency, before and after Recreated diagram showing the old survey firing unpredictably many times per session across the year, versus the redesigned survey firing only twice a year in two clean four-week windows. OLD: SESSION-TRIGGERED (DISABLED) Every dot is a pop-up a provider could hit: unpredictable, no pattern. NEW: TIME-BOXED, TWICE A YEAR 4 WKS 4 WKS Two predictable windows a year, everything else is quiet. Recreated diagram, illustrative, not the original triggering logs.
The old survey's unpredictable frequency was the direct cause of the fatigue that got it disabled.

My Role

I led the end-to-end redesign: auditing the legacy instrument, defining the new measurement model, writing and structuring the survey itself, and coordinating with design, analytics, and platform partners to launch it across both portals.

Approach

The survey as one input in a broader research stack Recreated diagram showing the sitewide survey as one of five inputs, alongside call analytics, digital analytics, session replay, and interviews, feeding into product decisions. Sitewide Survey Call Analytics Digital Analytics Session Replay Interviews Product Decisions
The survey was deliberately positioned as one signal among several, not a stand-alone source of truth.

Key Findings

~20,000 valid responses came in during the survey's first live cycle, strong participation for a redesigned instrument.
37% of respondents named Benefits & Eligibility information as their top improvement priority: the clearest single signal to come out of the first cycle.
Nearly 2,200 open-ended responses across the two new qualitative questions surfaced recurring language patterns pointing to specific friction points the closed-ended questions alone couldn't show.
A known limitation: the survey only reaches providers who use the portal in the first place. Those who don't (or whose portal experience is limited enough that they avoid it) are systematically underrepresented, a selection bias built into any portal-delivered instrument.

Recommendations & What's Next