Indeed Anti-fraud Practices: International Expansion
Executive Summary
As an embedded UX Researcher for Indeed's Trust & Safety Anti-Fraud team, I investigated how to effectively extend fraud prevention measures from the US to Great Britain and Canada.
Through prototype testing, comparative analysis, and terminology research with employers in these markets, I discovered that while security concerns were similar across regions, terminology differences created significant friction.
My research led to region-specific terminology recommendations, enhanced verification explanations, and alternative verification methods.
This work facilitated cross-team collaboration between anti-fraud and internationalization teams, establishing a framework for adapting content across English-speaking countries without requiring full translation.
The Challenge
Indeed's Trust & Safety Anti-Fraud team faced a critical challenge: systems for preventing fake employer accounts were primarily designed for US markets, but data showed that fraudsters were increasingly targeting job seekers in Great Britain and Canada. These fake accounts posed significant risks:
Job seekers were vulnerable to scams and identity theft
Indeed's reputation and trustworthiness were at stake
Adding to the complexity, this project took place during a period of organizational change including significant layoffs, requiring adaptability and focus to maintain momentum despite shifting team dynamics and resources.
My objective: To research how to effectively extend US fraud prevention measures to Great Britain and Canada while identifying unique regional considerations that would inform future design and product development.
Methodologies
I employed four research methods with all participants to gain comprehensive insights:
1. Usability testing
Why: To observe real reactions to verification flows and identify friction points specific to these markets
How: Used interactive prototypes of verification screens adapted from US versions
2. Cross-Industry Security Perception Polls
Why: To understand how employers perceive security needs across different industries and contextualize verification requirements
How: Presented Likert-style polls comparing security expectations across 6 industries (Banking, Hiring, Social Media, E-commerce, Mobile Payment Apps, and Personal Health Records)
3. Document Verification Assessment
Why: To identify which business documents would be most accessible and acceptable for verification in each region
How: Presented structured tables of potential verification documents with questions about accessibility, comfort sharing, and practical considerations
4. Terminology and Communication Testing
Why: To ensure clear communication with English-speaking international audiences using the same language but different terms
How: Tested alternative terminology for key concepts (e.g., "Scammer" vs. "Fraudster" vs. "Imposter") and gathered feedback on the best phrasing of verification explanations
Key Findings
Through my research, I uncovered several critical insights:
Regional Terminology Challenges:
British employers were confused by US terminology in verification flows (e.g., "Headquarters mailing address" vs. "Registered address")
Small language differences created significant confusion and hesitation during the verification process
Document Accessibility Issues:
Many employers didn't consistently have access to the document types requested in the verification flow
Document titles and formats varied by region more than anticipated despite being in English
Verification Understanding Gaps:
Employers didn't understand why verifying a personal ID would verify a business
Participants didn't view hiring as an industry with high security needs (unlike banking)
Limited awareness of how fraud affects company reputation and job seekers
Cross-market Commonalities:
Despite terminology differences, British and Canadian employers shared many of the same fundamental concerns as US employers
Solutions & Impact
Based on my research findings, I delivered:
1. Region-Specific Terminology Recommendations
Created a framework for adapting verification flows with region-appropriate terminology
Identified specific term changes for British and Canadian markets (e.g., "HMRC document" instead of "HM Revenue and Customs document")
2. Enhanced Verification Explanations
Developed clearer explanations of why verification protects both employers and job seekers
Created educational content explaining what fraudsters do with fake accounts
3. Alternative Verification Methods
Recommended exploring additional document options better aligned with what employers in each region typically have accessible
The impact of my work:
Provided critical support for improving employer verification experience in international markets
Created the impetus for cross-team collaboration between the anti-fraud and internationalization teams
Established a foundation for adapting content for different English-speaking countries without full translation
Ultimately helped protect job seekers in new markets from fraudulent activities while maintaining a smooth experience for legitimate employers
Key Learnings & Transferable Insights
This project demonstrated that effective internationalization requires more nuance than simple translation. Even when countries share a language, regional differences in terminology, business practices, and documentation require thoughtful adaptation to reduce friction and maintain security.
By combining multiple research methodologies, I was able to identify both technical requirements and emotional concerns, leading to solutions that balanced security needs with user experience.