Individual Plans & Pricing
As Pluralsight expanded its individual subscription offerings from two plans to six, selecting the right plan became increasingly difficult. I led UX exploration for a redesigned pricing experience that reduced cognitive load, improved plan comparison, and created a framework for user testing and live experimentation.
role.
Senior UX Designer
timeline.
Q4 2025
outcome.
mixed results
The Opportunity
Originally, Pluralsight's Individual Plans page presented customers with just two straightforward subscription options: Core Tech and Complete.
As the business expanded, four specialized plans—AI+, Cloud+, Data+, and Security+—were introduced to better serve learners with focused interests. While these additions created more flexibility, they also introduced more complexity at one of the most critical moments in the customer journey.
Behavioral data quickly revealed the impact.
-
Pricing page click-through rate dropped by approximately 40%
-
Complete and Core tech still accounted for 76% of purchases
-
Cloud+ was the only Plus plan with meaningful adoption at 14%
-
Only 25% of visitors scrolled beyond the pricing cards
-
Just 10% of users interacted with the plan comparison module
The comparison experience contained valuable information, but most users never reached it. Instead, many were forced to make a decision using only the information visible within the pricing cards themselves.
Our hypothesis was simple:
Helping users better understand the differences between plans would increase confidence in their selection, ultimately improving click-through to checkout and overall conversion.
The Challenge
We needed to simplify a growing product lineup without removing customer choice.
The redesign needed to:
-
Reduce decision fatigue across six subscription options
-
Highlight the plans customers most frequently selected
-
De-emphasize lower-performing plans without hiding them
-
Increase engagement with the plan comparison experience
-
Help customers feel confident they were choosing the right subscription for their learning goals
Exploration
Rather than jumping directly into a solution, I explored several pricing models designed to simplify decision-making while preserving access to every plan. Following stakeholder review, we conducted unmoderated usability testing with 50 participants to evaluate each concept.
I partnered closely with our UX research team, observing sessions and helping identify patterns across participant feedback. We evaluated each concept against four key criteria:
-
Purchase intent
-
Clarity
-
Ease of use
-
Decision confidence
Option 1: Good, Better, Best
To simplify the expanded six-plan lineup, I consolidated the experience into three primary pricing tiers using a familiar Good, Better, Best model. The center card represented the Plus plans, allowing users to select AI+, Cloud+, Data+, or Security+ via radio buttons, with Cloud+ preselected based on its stronger conversion performance.
Both the content and layout reinforced the progression between plans. Included course libraries expanded from Core Tech to Complete, while card height increased to reflect the growing feature set, helping users quickly understand the value of each tier.
The Solution
Rather than selecting a single winning concept, we synthesized the strongest ideas from each exploration into a final prototype. Every design decision was informed by usability testing and validated through a second round of user interviews.
The resulting experience prioritized clarity, confidence, and easier plan comparison.
-
Good, better, best hierarchy
User testing confirmed that three primary pricing cards didn't feel overwhelming, allowing us to spotlight our highest-performing plans while creating a clear progression from Core Tech to Complete through both content and visual hierarchy.
-
Designed for confident decision-making
Participants consistently preferred seeing enough information within the pricing cards to make an informed decision. Instead of minimizing content, we surfaced the most important plan details upfront while reserving the modal for payment options and featured content.
-
Comparison became a first-class experience
The redesigned comparison chart was one of the strongest-performing elements in testing. Users found it intuitive and appreciated being able to quickly compare plans side by side, so it was given greater prominence in the final experience.
The final design was developed across every responsive breakpoint before being launched as an A/B test, allowing the team to continue validating assumptions and optimizing the purchasing experience with real customer behavior.
The results
+18.9%
overall engagement
-20.4%
CTR to cart/checkout
+26.5%
cart conversion rate
The redesign produced encouraging—but mixed—results.
Stakeholders ultimately chose to revert to the original six-card experience. Shortly afterward, broader business priorities shifted toward B2B customers, limiting opportunities for additional iteration on the Individual Plans experience.
Reflection
One of the biggest lessons from this project was that improving a user experience doesn't always produce improvements across every business metric.
While our redesign increased engagement and improved downstream cart conversion, it also introduced friction earlier in the purchase journey. Rather than viewing the project as a failure, we treated it as valuable learning that challenged several of our assumptions about how customers evaluate subscription options.
The research reinforced the importance of validating ideas with real users, measuring success across multiple metrics, and recognizing that optimization is rarely a single iteration. Given additional opportunities, I would have continued refining the experience through smaller experiments focused specifically on reducing the drop-off between the pricing page and cart while preserving the gains we observed later in the funnel.