About

Resume

Projects

Experience

Life stories

Let's connect

One Missing Channel, 4+ Churning Clients: Building Landing Pages from zero for MoEngage's Suite

Building Landing Pages from zero for MoEngage's Suite

My Role

Product designer

Platform

Web B2B SaaS

Status

Shipped

Team

1 PD, 1 PM, 5+
engineers

1 PD, 1 PM, 5+
engineers

What did I do?

User research

Hi-fi designs

Usability test

Metrics tracking

Stakeholder alignment

Quality control & execution

I owned

End-to-end design

From research and IA to final hi-fi designs, prototypes, usability testing, and developer hand-off of both phase.

I collaborated

PM + engineering

Worked closely with PM on PRD translation, weekly design critics with engg. & Editor evaluation ( Bee vs. brizy).

I influenced

Product strategy

Shaped phase 2 scope by surfing usability test input that revealed which advanced feature would drive adoption.

Metrics Tracking & Strategy

Critical Design Decisions

Competitive Research

Framework Building

User Research

Usability Testing

Hi-Fidelity Designs

Quality Control & Execution

Stakeholder Alignment

What did I do?

Owned End-to-end design of both phases | research & IA to hi-fi designs, prototypes, & usability testing | Collaborated PM + engineering & shaped phase 2 scope by surfing usability test input

Understanding what we were building

What is a Landing page?

  • A landing page is a standalone web page created for a specific marketing or advertising campaign, with a single purpose to maximise conversions and reduce drop-offs in the customer journey. Unlike general website pages, it strips away distractions and drives visitors toward one clear action.


  • Moengage Landing page was created as part of a MoEngage channels suit - typically linked through other channels like push notifications, emails, SMS, or in-app messages.


  • It enabled our user’s(Marketers) to provide a destination for their users to "land" after clicking a link in an email, push notification, ad, or any other digital channel.

The market Gap - Why this problem existed

0%

0%

Of the B2B advertisement clicks go to homepage instead of landing page

0%

0%

Of the clients using LPs used 3rd party tools & were fed up by broken workflow

0%

0%

Was the average LP conversion rate vs 2-5% for generic web pages

Business context & Opportunity

What is MoEngage & why did this matter?

  • MoEngage® is an AI-driven engagement SaaS platform. It helps brands analyse customer behaviour & engage them with personalised communication across multiple channels, including push, email, in-app, SMS, and WhatsApp.


  • Marketers sent campaigns from these channels to landing pages built on external tools, creating fragmented experience. MoEngage owned the pre-click journey brilliantly. But after a user clicked a campaign CTA, they landed on pages completely outside MoEngage's ecosystem. Attribution broke. Personalisation stopped and Data vanished.


  • Among 6 competitors Braze, CleverTap, Iterable etc, only Iterable had it. Braze had it on the roadmap. This was a closing window.

The problem was costing real money.The data made it undeniable.

Churn signal

Ally ($71,667 ARR)

was churning

Pipeline blocked

20+ prospects

required this feature

Market gap

Competitors don't

have this natively

🔥

The burning platform

Ally ($71,667 ARR) was actively churning. They had built an internal landing page solution because MoEngage didn't support it natively. They were migrating away. This wasn't a future risk, it was happening now.

Understanding and Framing the problem

Three layers of a deeply complex problem

After synthesising all the research, business signals, customer discovery calls and data from sales & CS teams. I framed the problem across three distinct layers to have a deeper understanding of the issues in the current workflow.

01

Marketer's Workflow Problem

Marketers managing campaigns had to leave the platform, & log into a separate tool (Unbounce / HubSpot), create a LP, manually copy the URL back, and hope their data tracked correctly. Every campaign was a context-switch nightmare with no personalisation bridge between the message and the destination.

02

Campaign Analytics Problem

Because landing pages lived outside MoEngage, marketers couldn't attribute the conversions back to campaigns with confidence. Page-level analytics (bounce rate, session duration, form submissions, click-throughs) were in a completely separate system. ROI measurement was guesswork.

03

Broken Personalisation Problem

A user who clicked a personalised push notification promoting "sports shoes in Chennai" would land on a generic product page. MoEngage had rich user attribute data - location, behaviour history - but none of it reached the user because the last mile was broken.

Design goals

Goals measured not assumed

🎯

Publish in under 30 minutes

From a blank canvas to a live Landing page. No dev dependency.

🎯

Personalisation continuity

Campaign attributes carry onto the page. Zero manual re-entry.

🎯

Analytics in one place

Campaign + Landing Page data in one dashboard. No Excel stitching.

🎯

Zero external tools needed

Replace Unbounce / HubSpot LP dependency entirely.

Current state without landing pages

The broken journey every marketer lived with

Pain points by frequency (12 Interviews)

How This Impacted the Business

📉 Customer Churn

Ally ($71K MRR) built their own internal LP solution and churned. Several accounts cited LP as reason to evaluate alternatives at renewal.

🚪 Deal Blockage

20+ active RFPs had LP as a mandatory requirement. $1M+ pipeline losing or delayed to Braze & HubSpot who could check that box.

📊 NPS Gap

"Landing pages" was the #1 feature request across 3 consecutive NPS surveys. Most cited gap in qualitative enterprise follow-ups.

Discovery & Competitive research

Primary & secondary research

1 Competitors

1 Competitors

Only Iterable had LP. Braze was in beta. Building now meant 12–18 months of advantage.

0 Hours

0 Hours

On third party it took hours from marketers to build and connect and LP to MoEngage attributions

0+ Third party

0+ Third party

7+ dedicated third party LP tools audited: Leadpages, Unbounce, HubSpot, Landing +4 more

Key research findings

"I switch between 4 tools to run one single campaign" —

workflow fragmentation

Personalisation is the biggest unmet need — and MoEngage's unique advantage

Setup complexity simply kills the adoption — even when tools the also exists.


Attribution breaks outside MoEngage. Because of which user raised tickets

Costing trust in data

Braze - one of our direct competitor had it in their roadmap -

12 months of advantage

It takes too much time to create LP from scratch & match design language -

Templates were needed

🔍

The research insight that reframed everything

"The problem isn't that marketers don't know how to build landing pages. It's that the tool they trust for everything else — MoEngage — stops helping them the moment a user clicks a button. The landing page is MoEngage's biggest drop-off."

Critical design decisions & trade-offs

Landing pages as a channel

Familiar creation

Placed Landing Pages alongside other channels in the navigation. This framing ensured the creation flow could mirror other channels experience.

Trade - OFF

More Engineering efforts

Adding it in main navigation increases cognitive load users. Eng. flagged more integrations required & backend effort needed. accepted this minor delay

Editor Chosen - Brizy

Compact element panel

More editing space in Brizy. In Bee, the panel covers 30% of the canvas.

AI page generation

Brizy can generate page from prompt, aligned with future scope.

Not chosen - Bee trade - off

Local build available

Bee could be built locally, But Brizy could build MoEngage-specific build.

More element variety

Brizy had more elements which covered all MVP use cases.

Personalisation trigger in editor

Personalisation triggered inline

via "@" in the editor

Personalisation invoked by typing "@" inside any text block. Mirrors how email personalisation works in HubSpot and Mailchimp, making it instantly familiar to experienced marketers.

Trade - OFF

Discoverability Issues

Inline triggers inside open-ended editors have a discoverability problem. Usability testing round 2 confirmed this: 2 of 6 participants never discovered personalisation without a prompt. The compromise was to add placeholder.

Not to start from blank

Template gallery as the default

editor entry, not a blank canvas

Usability testing rounds showed an average of 4 mins of hesitation before first edit when users opened a blank canvas. Changed the default so the template gallery opens first. Blank canvas remains available as an explicit choice, not the default starting point.

Trade - OFF

Accepted one-extra-click cost for

power users.

Changing for all users including technical marketers who prefer to start from scratch, has to consciously opt out of the gallery now. For the minority of power users, this adds one extra click. Accepted this cost for power users instead of 4-mins paralysis for majority.

Designing the structure before any pixel

Information hierarchy

One of the important IA decision was framing Landing Pages as a channel. Not a tool, template library or settings page. This placed it alongside Email, Push, SMS and In-app, making the creation flow familiar from day one.

20+ innovative ideas from the team

A cross-functional ideation sprint over 3 days. Instead of ideating in a silo, we decided on sourcing ideas from the whole team of designers, PMs, engineers, and marketers. We used a slack channel to collect ideas. Then dot-voted on feasibility vs. impact. “personalisation superpowers". placing it as a channel

Conditional variations

Marketers can create variations of LP based on attributes like day of week, time of day, geolocation etc. This enables personalised experience for users.

Dynamic text

Marketer dynamically replace specific text elements (e.g., CTAs, headings) in the landing page. This ensures personalized content at scale.

Templates

Creating templates as per user scenario like sale, user retention etc. So that user can start creating LP instantly in few mins without much friction.

As a channel

Place landing page alongside other channels like Email, Push, SMS & In-app, making the creation flow familiar from the day one.

User Journey

The primary user journey flow maps a marketer's complete journey from entering the LP module to a live published Landing page.

Wireframes & Explorations

Mid fidelity wireframes and explorations done, while simultaneously talking to the user and making improvisations on the user experience.

Validation & Usability Testing

Testing at every point - not just at the end

I along with the Product manager, talked to 20 to 25 marketers who uses our dashboard to know which of the ideas excite them. Additionally we had run polls in Slack channels. Some of the user inputs were like these:

"Didn't know I could personalise the page until I saw @ hint but once discovered, it was natural"

"Creating an LP from the start is consuming a lot of time since It's a new channel"

"I want to see personalisation in my LP normal preview does not help much"

Design changes based on findings

Template first

Enabled all our marketers to make any landing page faster, by adding multiple templates.

Personalisation hint

Added "Type @ to personalise" a place holder to create better learnability curve

Preview in editor

Added personalised preview, of landing page as many user pointed out & faced challenges

Key Hi-fidelity Phase 1 & 2 screens

Final designs phase 1 & 2

Phase 1 delivered the foundational creation experience: LP listing, Creation steps, Third party editor integration & Personalisation.

Scroll

>>>

Phase 2 added three advanced features that MoEngage's LP from "functional" to "genuinely differentiated" These were capabilities mot standalone LP tools don't offer natively.

Phase -2 Features

Cohort in lP

Assign audience cohort to specific Landing page variants. Cohort selection experience mirrors rest of the campaign channels audience selection to reduce cognitive load.

Dynamic text replace

The text elements can updates and renders dynamically from URL parameters or user attributes. Fallback text is mandatory learned from talking to user in phase 1.

A/b variations

Marketers can test LP variants against each other by creating multiple iterations & sending it to different set of users to test performance of all the variation.

Challenges & Setbacks

  • The "@" personalisation trigger was a significant discoverability problem. In the first round of hi-fi testing, 2 of 6 participants never found personalisation at all. They completed the task — they published a landing page — but they missed the feature that makes MoEngage's LP genuinely different from any external tool. A feature can be well-designed and still be invisible.

  • The editor selection decision (Bee vs. Brizy) took longer than expected. What seemed like a straightforward technical comparison turned into a cross-functional debate — engineering had a preference for Bee because of its local build availability, while design and product leaned Brizy for the template library and UX quality. Reaching conviction required building a structured evaluation matrix and pressure-testing it with actual marketers before the team aligned..

  • Users were not able to find the right template as per their use cases, As the template listing page was too crowded, So we had to introduce use cases type filters.


Outcomes & Impact

0+

0+

Paying clients for Landing page, They needed LP explicitly

$0K ARR

$0K ARR

Derived from clients who purchased our LP subscription

$0K MRR

$0K MRR

100% derived from paying customers on monthly basis

0st

0st

Among 6 direct competitors to ship a fully native LP

Business outcome

The feature directly opened renewed conversation with ING Australia, premier league, Panasonic EU. Phase 2's cohort targeting and Dynamic text replacement positioned MoEngage ahead of Iterable on LP personalisation depth.

What i'd measure next

LP creation rate per active customer. Time-to-first-publish per marketer segment. Personalisation feature adoption rate (% of published LPs using @persoanlisation). A/B test completion rate. These metrics are set up in MoEngage analytics dashboard.

Reflection & Takeaway

This project was a powerful reminder that testing at low fidelity first was the best process decision I made. The wireframe round caught the biggest structural problem, the open-ended Step 2 entry, before any visual design was committed. Every hour spent on lo-fi testing saved at least three hours of rework. The temptation to skip straight to hi-fi is always there, especially when the timeline is tight. But I'll resist it more confidently now.


My key takeaway was that constraints are better UX than choices. Every time I gave users more options, a blank canvas, an optional fallback, an unconstrained URL field. User showed hesitation, confusion, or errors while testing. But when I replaced a choice with an intelligent default - template gallery first & required fallback etc. the flow got faster.

Thanks for watching

Next Project

Back to work

Let's have a word?


Priyanshi Singh

singhpriyanshii100@gmail.com

LinkedIn

Behance

Instagram

Let's have a word?

Priyanshi Singh

singhpriyanshii100@gmail.com

LinkedIn

Behance

Instagram

About

Projcts

Resume

Experience

Life stories

Start a Project

To view full case study, please open the link on a desktop :)

Next Project

Back to work

Create a free website with Framer, the website builder loved by startups, designers and agencies.