Design built for impact

Because pretty interfaces that don’t convert are just expensive wallpaper. As a data-driven UX designer, I build for users, not just what looks good on a Dribbble shot.

View cases

Get in touch

Lars is an exceptional UX professional with an incredible analytical approach to problem-solving.

Jan Mraz, Atheros Intelligence Ltd

Portrait of Lars Broekzitter, data-driven UX designer and CRO specialist.

What I can do for you

UX Research

Gut feelings don’t scale. I find the friction, blind spots, and broken flows.

UX / Product Design

I design digital products that make sense, look sharp, and get used.

Conversion Rate Optimization

Clicks, signups, checkouts. I test, track, and tweak until the numbers move.

No guesswork, just results.

Research First, ego last

Design without research is just decoration. I dig into user behavior, business goals, and friction points first. No fluff. No guesswork. Every decision has a purpose.

Build with users

If it doesn’t work for real users, it doesn’t work, period. I involve users early and often, validating ideas through testing and feedback, because assumptions kill good UX.

Data Decides

Gut feelings won’t optimize conversion rates. As a data-driven UX designer, I rely on heatmaps, analytics and testing, not assumptions. I tweak until the numbers prove the design works.

Test, fail, iterate, win

Winning isn’t about getting it right on the first try. It’s about learning and improving fast. I test, analyze, and iterate with purpose, turning failures into insights and insights into wins.

UX / Product Design

CRO

Psychology

It wasn’t the fee, it was the feeling.

Users were ready to buy, until the fee felt like a fine. Shipping wasn’t just a cost. It was a confidence-breaker. And the real challenge? We couldn’t remove it.

I led the UX strategy, research, design and testing behind reframing shipping perception without changing the price.

We used post-purchase surveys, drop-off data, and complaint patterns to identify emotional friction points.

Why it mattered

We couldn’t change the shipping cost.
€4.95 had to stay, our margins on OEM products were too tight.

The constraint was non-negotiable.
But the perception of that fee? That’s where we had room to move.

Some users complained.
But most? They just left.
No warning, just hesitation, silence, and an abandoned cart.

That single line in the summary was doing quiet damage.
Not because of the price itself, but because of how it felt:
Like a last-minute penalty.

This project taught me that problem-solving often happens under constraint, and sometimes, the problems are bigger than they first appear.

The problem

Users got all the way to the cart, then hesitated.
Everything made sense until a €4.95 shipping fee tipped the balance.

We saw the pattern: hesitation, drop-off, and complaints.
But removing the fee wasn’t an option.
Our margins on OEM were already thin.

So we asked a different question:
If we can’t change the price, can we change how it feels?

Designing for Perception, Not Price

We couldn’t remove the shipping fee, but we could reframe it.
Over several iterations, we repositioned value around the €4.95 cost:

– Moved discount information directly above the shipping line to rebalance perceived value
– Rewrote “Shipping Costs” to a more neutral “Shipping”
– Added trust cues like “With Track & Trace”
– Introduced outcome-based copy: “Carefully packed and quickly shipped”
– Used color, spacing, and labels to highlight savings more clearly

Each variant tested using A/B experiments to validate emotional response and conversion impact.

The goal wasn’t to disguise the fee, it was to make it feel like part of the service, and not like that last-minute penalty.

Impact

The biggest win? Silence.
Complaints about shipping dropped by 36%, the clearest sign that friction was fading and trust was returning.

The data backed it up:
+1.62% transactions from discount repositioning.
+7.04% transaction with “With Track & Trace.”
+1.85% transactions with “Carefully packed & quickly shipped.

This is how we shipped (pun intended) results under real constraints.

Control vs. variant layout comparison showing how a data-driven UX designer repositioned shipping costs and discounts on the cart page.

UX A/B test comparing version A and B of a 2-column product detail page layout.

UX / Product Design

CRO

We had a great deal, and our users didn’t see it…

Users weren’t choosing our housebrand cartridges over OEM, even though they were cheaper for them and more profitable for us.

I led the UX strategy, experimentation, and interface design across two test iterations, using clickmaps, user tests, and A/B experiments.

Why it mattered

We knew our housebrand product delivered great value, but that wasn’t enough.
Users stuck with what felt familiar, not necessarily what made sense.

This project showed me how easily uncertainty can override logic when faced with the familiar versus the unfamiliar. And how visual clarity can shift that behavior, even without changing the offer.

The goal was simple: increase housebrand conversions.

But what we gained was bigger:
More users didn’t just convert, they chose.
We didn’t push them.

Sometimes the best outcome isn’t more buyers, it’s more confident ones.

The problem

Users didn’t see the value.
Housebrand cartridges already felt like a risk, they weren’t the familiar brand.

And when the upfront price was higher, without a clearly highlighted reason, users defaulted to what felt safe: OEM.

The better deal was there, in price-per-ml, but it was buried in plain sight. And what’s not seen doesn’t shape decisions.

We made value unmissable

We started by optimizing the user flow by repositioning the product switch using the Gutenberg diagram, making it more prominent, easier an quicker to notice.

Switch interactions went up +6.01%
But conversions barely moved.
Users noticed the option, but still didn’t see the value in our housebrand.

So we tackled the real blocker: Clarity.
We highlighted what mattered most, the price-per-print/ml indicator, showing users hard proof they were getting more for less.

Impact

The moment users understood the deal, they took it.

On top of the +6.01% uplift in switch use we saw:
+45.16% uplift in housebrand transactions
+3.78% uplift in add-to-cart rate

We can conclude from this that we didn’t really convince ‘more’ users to buy products, but users made a more conscious choice which product they bought.

Our design changes didn’t just earn attention, they earned trust.

This is how we turned hidden value into a 45% boost in conversions.

Accessibility

CRO

No One Cares About Accessibility… Until It Works

We knew the site had accessibility issues: missing focus states, poor contrast, barely any screen reader support.

But with a 20+ year-old codebase, nothing is simple. But honestly, code wasn’t the hardest part.

Mindset was, so I did what I always do when something’s hard to sell: I turned accessibility into a business case.

I led the project from end to end. Analyzed user data, created buy-in, and delivered WCAG-compliant improvements, without hurting conversions.

Why it mattered

Our audience skews older. The majority of our users are over 50, and when I dug into the age data, it became clear: This wasn’t an edge case, it affected a massive part of our user base. We were dealing with real, paying customers, and we were making life harder for them.

If someone can’t see a button or read a text clearly, tab through with a keyboard, or understand which element is selected, you lose them. Simple as that.

But this wasn’t only about user needs. It was also a legal risk, and the clock was ticking.

The European Accessibility Act would be implemented from June 28, 2025. That’s not a nice-to-have milestone. That’s a deadline. We had to move, but not just for compliance, but because inaccessible design also means lost revenue today.

The problem

We weren’t starting from a clean slate.

Our code has been evolving for over two decades, of course every new code is written correctly and up to date, but some parts of our site had been untouched for a very long time.

But the deeper problem was organizational inertia. Accessibility had been a nice-to-have. Management worried about a return on investment and “taking accessibility too far.” A common quote was “blind users don’t use a printer” Everyone assumed users were doing fine, but the ones who struggled often never made it far enough to complain.

From moral choice to metric

We needed proof, and we needed it fast.

So I started small: On the product detail page, we show a switch between original brand cartridges and our cheaper-per-millilitre private label. The green text here failed contrast checks, so we changed it to black. That’s all.

Just a color change. And we could test this ourselves without front-end developers, which made it a very cheap experiment.

Results:
Netherlands: +2.69% conversion (Bayesian: 69%)
Belgium: +9.74% in BE (Bayesian: 95%)

Yes, we tested button colors

That small win created momentum. If a contrast fix could increase conversions, what would happen if we tackled our primary CTA that was failing contrast checks?

We tested a darker version of our green, keeping it visually close to the original for brand consistency. Other (bolder) options like pink, black, yellow, or red are still on the table, but this gave us the cleanest starting point.

Impact

Netherlands: +0,43% uplift (Bayesian: 43%)
Belgium: +3,16% uplift (Bayesian 86%)
Germany: +7.16% uplift (Bayesian: 96%)
France: -7.90% (Bayesian: 3%) Likely tied to younger users.

Overall: An average uplift across all shops
Mobile: Strong performance across the board, supporting our theory that contrast matters more on small screens in real-world lighting.

We had enough proof to move forward and implement the new accessible green as the standard across the site as our hypothesis stated that conversions shouldn’t drop as a result of these changes.
Down the line we even improved our conversions while being more accessible, meaning more users can use our webshop just like people without a (temporary or permanent) impairment can.

Now what?

We’ve implemented visible focus states, improved text contrast across almost the entire webshop, and ensured our primary CTA meets WCAG 2.1 AA contrast requirements. Link accessibility for screen readers is currently underway.

More importantly, the conversation inside the company has shifted.

Developers now see accessibility as an optimization, not a blocker. Management understands that compliance and conversion can go hand in hand.

And we’ve proven and inspired others to look at accessibility as improvements that can be measured and experimented with.

We didn’t just fix a button color. We changed how the company sees accessibility, from a legal burden to an advantage.

Side-by-side comparison of control and variant in an ab-test for improvement in accessibility by a data-driven UX designer.

An image of a UX flowchart of the reset password flow

UX / Product Design

User Flow Design

Users hadn’t forgotten their goals, our flow had.

A user forgets their password, it happens. They reset it and expect to pick up where they left off. Instead, they landed somewhere that didn’t make sense.

I led the analysis and redesign of PrintAbout’s password reset flow to reduce friction and restore momentum for users returning to complete their goal.

Why it mattered

It’s easy to overlook things like password resets. They’re invisible when they work. But when they don’t, they break trust, momentum, and sometimes the entire experience.

I learned to stop asking “Does it function?” and start asking:
“Does it respect what the user is trying to do?”

It taught me to look at design more honestly, not only from the system’s perspective, but also from the user’s.

It sharpened a core belief:
“If it doesn’t work for real users, it doesn’t work, even if it technically does.”

It was about listening to users, recognizing the friction we’d normalized, and rebuilding trust with thoughtful defaults.

The problem

The password reset flow was technically functional, but functioning isn’t the same as working.
Users weren’t just resetting their password, they were trying to reach their goal.

We ran five user tests and watched the same thing happen every time:
No matter where they started, they were all dropped on the cart page, still logged out, disoriented, and further away from their goal.

It wasn’t their fault. It was ours.

Rebuilding with user intent

We started by identifying two distinct entry points, and two very different intentions:

Checkout users had one clear goal: Place an order.
Dropping them back at the cart forced them to repeat steps they’d already taken. It felt like starting over, and worse, like being punished for forgetting.
Now, they’re returned directly to the shipping step, already logged in, ready to continue without friction.

Account users weren’t trying to buy, they needed invoices, order history, or address updates.
The old flow dropped them in the wrong place entirely, the cart.
Now, they land in their account dashboard, logged in and back on track.

By restoring context and removing unnecessary steps, we turned a frustrating detour into a seamless continuation.

Now, users move forward, not back.

Impact

This change didn’t generate a massive revenue spike, because most users resetting their password were already deeply motivated to finish their task, but that wasn’t the point.

Sure, they could still complete the task.
And yes, most would’ve come back eventually.
But that frustration? It sticks, to the brand, the memory, the next visit.

This is how we turned a technical flow into a human one.

What others say about me.

I can try to convince you of my skills, but I’d rather let others tell you!

Lars is an exceptional UX professional with an incredible analytical approach to problem-solving.

His ability to break down complex challenges and craft intuitive, user-centered solutions backed by real data is truly impressive.

Beyond his remarkable skills, Lars is always ready to support the design community with his valuable insights and guidance, making him a trusted and inspiring figure for anyone fortunate enough to collaborate with him.

Jan MrazAtheros Intelligence Ltd

Through word of mouth, I heard that Lars creates unique designs for businesses. I shared my preferences and let myself be surprised.

My experience with Lars is that he’s very patient, thinks along with you, and is committed to delivering the best possible results to ensure client satisfaction.

I’m absolutely thrilled with the outcome, it looks professional! A beautiful design and stunning business cards. In my view, Lars is highly skilled and delivers top-quality work. I can wholeheartedly recommend him!

Caresse AntonissenInnerwork Caresse

This recommendation might be a bit biased since we’re family, but I can highly recommend Lars for CRO & UX-design projects.

My client was struggling with their website’s conversion rate, even though their SEO/SEA traffic had increased significantly. In a 1.5-hour Google Meet call, Lars provided a lot of actionable recommendations to improve conversions. He was able to clearly back up all of his tips with research and data as well. It was also evident during the call that Lars has a lot of knowledge and experience in CRO & UX-design. He really knows what he’s talking about.

If you’re looking for actionable tips to get more out of your website, I highly recommend reaching out to him.

Niels BroekzitterNiels Broekzitter Internet Marketing

“Technology should work around people, not the other way around.”

Let’s Create Something Together!

Whether you’re looking for a data-driven UX designer for your team, or just exploring new ideas, I’d love to hear from you. I always welcome meaningful conversations, portfolio feedback, or opportunities to solve real user problems together. Let’s connect and see where it leads.

Request sent successfully

There has been an error while submitting the form. Please verify your input.