Redesigning the EV Charging Experience

Mapping the Real Charging Experience

To understand what EV drivers actually need, we conducted research across France, Spain, and Portugal over several phases. The discovery phase involved 31 in-depth interviews and 600+ survey responses, which helped us identify two distinct user personas: The Commuter (daily charging for work) and The Road Tripper (long-distance travel charging). This research revealed fundamental pain points in how drivers plan, access, and pay for charging.

From this research, we created detailed user journey maps covering the four major steps in the charging experience: planning, accessing and activating the station, charging, and paying. The insights from these maps became the foundation for the redesign.

Why charging felt like a puzzle

Through interviews and observational research across multiple markets, we identified several critical pain points in the existing charging flow:

Availability wasn't actually clear. Drivers would navigate to a station only to find all chargers occupied. The app showed station-level availability, but what users really needed was charger-level availability. Seeing "6 available" at a station meant nothing if they needed a specific connector type.

The station vs. charger confusion was real. Users didn't distinguish between a charging station (the location) and individual charge points (the actual plugs). They'd see "Station 26" and assume that was what they needed to select, not realizing there might be four different chargers at that location with different speeds and prices.

Finding the right charger meant scrolling through everything. At locations with many charge points, users had to manually scan through each one to find their preferred type or an available unit. No search, no filters, just visual scanning.

Pricing came too late in the journey. Drivers wanted to know costs upfront when deciding where to charge, not after they'd already driven to a station. Hidden pricing created anxiety and eroded trust.

Speed specifications were unclear. The difference between a 22 kW and 200 kW charger is significant—it's the difference between a quick stop and planning your afternoon. But this information wasn't prominent enough in the decision-making process.

Charger status was ambiguous. "Available" should mean "plug in and go," but users encountered chargers marked available that were actually broken, reserved, or in maintenance mode. The status indicators weren't granular enough.

Trust was a problem. With dozens of operators and thousands of chargers, drivers needed social proof. Which stations actually work? Which ones are reliable? Reviews and community feedback were buried or nonexistent.

The operator information felt irrelevant. Users didn't care who operated the charger—they cared if it worked and how much it cost. But the app treated operator info as primary information while burying practical details.

Getting the team aligned

With these pain points mapped, I facilitated a sketch workshop with the team. The goal wasn't just to generate ideas—it was to align everyone on information hierarchy. When should users see what? What decisions happen at the map level versus the detail level?

We worked through the critical moments in the user journey:

• Scanning the map for options
• Evaluating a specific station
• Selecting an individual charge point
• Understanding what they'd pay and how fast they'd charge

The workshop helped us establish a clear principle: progressive disclosure. Don't overwhelm drivers with every detail at once. Show them what they need to make their next decision, then reveal more as they commit further.

Using Figma, I translated these workshop insights into interactive prototypes we could test internally and iterate on quickly.

Redesign for clarity

The Map View: Clarity at a Glance

The new map view uses a simple fraction format (3/1, 6/8, 4/6) that immediately tells drivers how many chargers are available versus total. No more guessing: real-time availability. I kept the favorite heart and filter controls accessible—drivers use these constantly, so they stay within thumb reach. The layered approach shows cluster counts at zoom-out levels, then individual stations as users zoom in.

Station Details: From Location to Decision Point

When a user taps a station, the bottom sheet reveals the context they need to decide if it's worth their time. I surfaced operator information at the top (since regulations sometimes matter), but immediately followed with the social proof—star ratings and comment count. The connector summary (3/1, 3/4 format) with power ratings and pricing gives drivers the key decision factors at a glance. No scrolling required to know if this station has what they need. Most importantly, I split the view into two tabs: "Charge points" and "Info." This separation acknowledges that users have different intents—some want to pick a charger and go, others want to read reviews or get directions. The tab structure lets each user choose their path.

Charge Point Selection: Finding Your Charger Shouldn't Be Hard

The redesigned charge point list tackles the search problem head-on. Each charge point card shows its ID number, power rating, price, and most critically, real-time status. "Available" in green, "Maintenance" in gray. The information hierarchy puts status first because that's what determines if the charger is usable. The grid view toggle (top right) gives power users an alternative scanning mode—sometimes you just want to see all your options at once without scrolling.

What I Learned from This Redesign

This redesign never made it to production. Shortly after completing the prototypes, Electromaps shifted its focus to another product line. It's one of those realities of design work: you create something solid, something that solves real problems, and sometimes business priorities change before it ships.

The process still shaped how I think about complex, multi-step experiences. EV charging isn't just about pretty interfaces. It's about reducing cognitive load at every decision point, knowing when to show information and when to hold it back. And making "available" actually mean available, not "probably working."

The research insights still stand. The pain points haven't disappeared. If I work on another charging experience, I'll bring the same principles: progressive disclosure, real-time status transparency, and availability that users can actually trust.