Leaner 'check account' booking step: more completed bookings
Test run byOnline DialogueCRO agency
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsOnline Dialogue removed extra content from Van der Valk's 'check account' booking step and gave the email field more focus, and both follow-up tests lifted completed bookings.
The case study does not share the size of the uplift.
The tests built on an earlier win on the same step and were published as an Online Dialogue case study.
- Completed bookings: both follow-up tests were reported as winners. Uplift figures, sample sizes and confidence levels were not shared.
- The earlier test on this step, which moved booking details above the fold, was also described as a strong uplift in completed bookings, again without a number.
- Online Dialogue's main lesson: guests were not really using this step to review their booking, so a more functional page with one clear task did better.
The change
Extra content removed and the email field made the focus of the step
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
The 'check account' step as it stood after an earlier winning test. Guests entered their email address here, and the details for checking their chosen room had already been moved above the fold.
Variant
Two follow-up versions were tested. One stripped out content the team saw as superfluous, and the other put more emphasis on filling in the email address.
Why it likely won
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- Fewer things on the page means less to read before the one action that matters, entering an email address.
- Visitors had already chosen a room, so review content at this point may have added doubt or distraction rather than reassurance.
- Making the email field the obvious focus likely cut hesitation at a step where people had been dropping off.
Caveats: Two separate tests are reported together, with no figures, sample sizes or durations shared. Van der Valk is a hotel group, so this is a travel booking flow rather than a classic lead form.
Who ran it
Online Dialogue ran this test and published the results (Online Dialogue case study). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on Online Dialogue →
How to run this test on your site
- Hypothesis
- If we remove non-essential content from the email step of our booking or enquiry flow and make the email field the clear focus, then more visitors will finish the flow because there is less to process and one obvious next action.
- Primary metric
- Completed bookings (or submitted leads) per visitor who reaches the email step
- Guardrails
- Drop-off at the following step
- Bookings cancelled or changed soon after
- Support contacts about wrong bookings
- Who should test it
- Lead-gen and booking businesses with a multi-step flow where an intermediate email or account step shows clear drop-off. It probably won't help if that step is already minimal, or if people genuinely need the review details, such as complex quotes.
Questions
Does removing content from a booking step increase conversions?
It can when the content is not helping people finish.
In Van der Valk's case, two tests that trimmed the 'check account' step both increased completed bookings, though no figures were shared.
Should a booking flow include a review step?
Only if people use it. Online Dialogue found that guests were not really checking their booking at this point, so a simpler step with one clear task worked better.