Carrier Loadboard: Loadsmart Loadboard's Redesign
One of my first major missions at Loadsmart was to evaluate and redesign the loadboard.
Loadsmart is a digital platform that connects companies needing to move freight with small, medium, and large logistics providers. The U.S. logistics market is one of the largest in the world, moving billions of dollars every month. Yet, surprisingly—or perhaps fortunately—many of the major players in the industry still rely heavily on offline processes, particularly through sales teams.
Project Role
Discover research
User experience
Visual design
Prototype
What is it?
The Loadsmart Carrier Loadboard is a digital freight marketplace where carriers and owner-operators can easily find and book loads from top shippers. It features tools like "Book It Now" for instant booking, filters for searching by location and rate, and integration with Loadsmart’s Carrier TMS for dispatch, tracking, and invoicing. Carriers must register and get approved to access the platform.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
How Much data is enough Data?
Our loadboard was a very feature-dry application. Carriers could log in, view and filter a list of loads, and accept one—nothing more. While it served its basic purpose, it lacked the depth needed to drive engagement and traction. To improve this, we needed to offer carriers additional features that solved their problems more effectively and efficiently.
The Challenge
The biggest challenge in creating the new loadboard page wasn’t purely technical, but rather understanding how much data was enough for a carrier to make a decision.
There were all sorts of data we could have shown to help carriers make informed decisions—but we had to be cautious about displaying potentially detrimental information, as it could become a double-edged sword. At that stage, the data being shown clearly wasn’t enough to help carriers determine whether a load was good or bad.
Anatomy of a load
The first challenge of the project was understanding how a load was sourced, and what internal and external processes were involved in this stage.
Since there was no internal documentation available, I facilitated a few collaborative sessions to map and document the sourcing process. These dynamics were essential to establish a shared understanding across teams and to lay the groundwork for informed design decisions.
Cross-Department Feature Journey Map
Feature Journey Mapping with Stakeholders
I brought together stakeholders from multiple departments involved in the lifecycle of a load—from sales reps to carrier operations managers—to co-create a Feature Journey Map. Unlike a typical user journey, the focus here was not on a single user, but on the success of the end-to-end functionality: sourcing, selling, and executing a load. This allowed us to visualize cross-functional dependencies and highlight both internal and external user touchpoints.
Internal Interviews + Shadowing Sessions with Load Sourcing and Sales reps
To gain a deep understanding of how loads were sourced and dispatched, I spent several days shadowing the Sales and Load Sourcing teams. I joined sales and dispatch calls as a silent observer and used the time between calls to interview sellers and dispatchers. This helped me identify internal pain points and better understand the workflows behind load booking and execution.
Benchmarking Competitors
To better understand industry standards and identify opportunities for differentiation, I conducted a competitive analysis of other loadboard platforms, including Convoy, Coyote, Truckstop, and 123Loadboard. This benchmarking exercise helped us surface UX patterns, pricing models, and feature gaps across the market.
Guerrilla User Interviews
Getting access to carriers and owner-operators proved to be a major challenge. Initial attempts to reach them via Hotjar surveys and Amazon gift card incentives yielded no meaningful engagement. Most truckers had little time to spare for interviews. Eventually, I was able to schedule brief, focused conversations by leveraging senior sales reps and managers as connectors. These short but targeted interviews helped validate key assumptions and uncover critical user frustrations.
Final Interface
After this round of research, a set of features was defined as crucial to improving the performance of loadboard sessions.
Loads List
The new Loadboard loads listing page introduced key usability improvements, including advanced filters to help carriers quickly find relevant loads. It also featured clear visual differentiation between load types—such as contracted, regular, VIP, and biddable loads—making it easier to prioritize options at a glance.
Additionally, the entire experience was designed to be fully responsive, ensuring seamless usability across devices.
Loads List
Not only we could show more information to help the carrier decide having a dedicated details page allows us to use it as an anchor for emails, notifications, and sharing between carriers/carrier sales reps.
Another important part is having the details page as a place to show related loads (loads that have a similar route and characteristics as the one being seen) and selling bundles.
On this page we could render these bundles and allow the carriers to take a bundle of N loads for some extra money and help him plan his routes.
The loadboard details page will is a powerful gateway for engagement.
Preferred Lanes
The Preferred Lanes feature was the first step in Loadsmart’s strategy to build out a comprehensive carrier profile. By allowing carriers to specify the lanes they most frequently run or prefer, the system could begin tailoring the experience to their actual preferences.
This data laid the groundwork for sending more accurate and desirable load recommendations via email, increasing both engagement and booking efficiency.
Bidding Tool
Through research and shadowing sessions, we discovered that at least half of the carriers wanted the ability to negotiate the load price—even if just for small amounts like $10–$20. To test whether enabling bids directly in the platform could reduce the need for phone calls with sales reps, we introduced a lightweight version of a bidding tool.
Instead of building the full feature upfront, we bootstrapped the experience using a Slack integration that notified a rep behind the scenes, simulating an automated response. After validating strong interest and positive results, we moved forward with developing the full bidding functionality.
Mobile Solution
We also redesigned and repurposed the mobile app to support the new bidding tool, which required faster and more reliable notifications due to the time-sensitive nature of bid acceptance.
Beyond bidding, the app became a critical piece in our operational toolkit—it allowed us to track carrier location in real time, enabling smarter load management and helping balance certain shipments based on the carrier’s geolocation. This dual purpose turned the app into both a communication channel and a logistics asset.
Validation and Iteration
After this round of research, a set of features was defined as crucial to improving the performance of loadboard sessions.
Testing
Internal user testing was conducted with a selected group of trusted carriers. They were invited to try early versions of the loadboard in a controlled environment, allowing for quick feedback loops and early detection of usability issues before broader rollout.
Quantitative Data
I brought together stakeholders from multiple departments involved in the lifecycle of a load—from sales reps to carrier operations managers—to co-create a Feature Journey Map. Unlike a typical user journey, the focus here was not on a single user, but on the success of the end-to-end functionality: sourcing, selling, and executing a load. This allowed us to visualize cross-functional dependencies and highlight both internal and external user touchpoints.
Tweaking
A/B testing played a crucial role in fine-tuning the interface. Multiple variations were tested, including button labels, element placement, and menu order, with the goal of increasing engagement and conversion rates across different carrier profiles.
Listening
Bi-weekly feedback sessions were scheduled with members of the dispatcher team. These meetings helped surface on-the-ground insights and provided a steady feedback loop from internal stakeholders closely tied to the load sourcing process.
