Adoric: from an early prototype to a no-code campaign platform

Rotem Elimelech (Rotem E) was Partner and VP Products at Adoric from 2014 to 2017.

He joined when Adoric was an early prototype that could show a message on a website, and over three years he defined and designed the product around it: the campaign editor, the audience and display rules, the A/B testing and analytics, and the campaign administration.

Everything shown in the Adoric case study shipped and ran with paying clients while he was there.

Today Rotem is a freelance product designer (UX/UI) in Tel Aviv, Israel. The Adoric years are the product-leadership part of his record: one person responsible for research, product definition, UX, branding and UI on a product that served marketers, agencies and the visitors of more than 100 websites. This page tells that story in text; the case study shows the screens.

View the Adoric case study · About Rotem · Discuss a project

Relevant experience for your project

• Taking a prototype to a product. Adoric arrived as a working demo of an engine; the product model, the editor, the rules and the measurement were built from it.
• Visual editors and no-code builders. A WYSIWYG canvas editor for popups, banners and onsite messages, with layouts, an element library, forms, position and animation controls, built for marketers who never touch code.
• User-configurable logic. Audience targeting and display rules written as readable conditions, with AND and OR, by people who are not programmers: a rule builder for segmentation without a developer.
• Experimentation and campaign analytics. Conversion rate optimization (CRO) in the product itself: A/B variations, goals, traffic splits and results next to the campaign, and a campaign dashboard that carries the numbers.
• Website personalization at scale. Exit-intent and behavior-based messages, lead-capture forms with integrations, and agency accounts running many client domains with users and permissions.

Adoric at a glance

What Rotem found, and what he built

When Rotem joined in 2014, Adoric was an early prototype. The engine could place a message on a live website, and that was the product: no real editor to design the message, no targeting or display rules, no tests or analytics, and no product structure around the engine.

By 2017 the product had all of it. A canvas editor where a marketer designs the message on a preview of the real page. An audience and rules layer that decides who sees a campaign and when. A/B testing with goals and traffic splits, and analytics per campaign. A campaign list with status, and an account with users and permissions, built for agencies managing many client domains.

Rotem’s role

As Partner and VP Products, Rotem owned research, product definition, UX and design, and took part in every other side of the company: marketing, sales, even the accounting. Four sources fed the product definition: calls and support conversations with the clients; the results of live campaigns, what converted and what visitors closed; the competing tools of the time; and sales demos, what prospects asked for and what stopped them from buying. The Adoric brand was created by Rotem and the team together.

The problem, and the constraints

Four problems, one product. Marketers waited on a developer for every on-site message. The tools that existed produced generic popups that looked nothing like the brand. Building a message, targeting it and testing it lived in separate tools. And websites lost visitors at the moment of exit or hesitation, with no way to respond in real time.

Four constraints shaped the design. The message renders inside the customer’s live site, on any layout, so the editor had to preview reality, not a mock. The main flow had to stay free of code. The script must not slow the host site, which limited what a message could do. And agencies ran many client domains from one account, which shaped the admin and the user roles.

Product decisions

Four decisions Rotem made and would defend today.

1. One campaign, three steps: Design, Audience, Rules

The decision: a campaign is built in one flow of three numbered steps, Design, Audience and Rules, with Save, Preview and Publish in reach at every step.

Why: creating a message, choosing who sees it and deciding when it appears are one marketing task. In 2014 they lived in different tools, or in a developer’s queue. The three steps put them in one place, in the order a marketer thinks.

Tradeoff: three steps mean moving between screens. The numbered steps stay visible the whole time, so the marketer knows where the campaign stands and can go back to any part.

Shown in the case study: the editor’s top bar in Main editor; the Audience step in Edit audience and rules.

2. A canvas editor, not a template picker

The decision: the message sits on a canvas that previews the real thing, with Layouts, Elements, Background, Position, Uploads and Steps in a rail beside it. Ready-made layouts are a starting point, never the ceiling.

Why: the strongest alternative was a template tool: pick a popup, fill in the text. It is faster to build, and it produces exactly the generic popups brands were tired of. Marketers needed on-brand messages without a developer, so the editor had to give real design freedom while staying code-free. Custom HTML exists, as an advanced option behind a click action, never in the main flow.

Tradeoff: freedom costs learning time and canvas space. The rail groups the controls by task, the layout library shortens the first campaign, and the elements panel (text, buttons, emoticons, shapes, forms, carousels) keeps the common cases one click away.

Shown in the case study: Main editor; Advanced editing (forms, position and animation, the layout library).

3. Audience rules a marketer can read

The decision: targeting is written as visible condition rows (language, traffic source, browser, new or returning visitor, purchase and membership) combined with AND and OR, which the marketer adds and removes.

Why: targeting is logic, but the person writing it is not a programmer. Segments defined once by an admin would have been simpler to build, and they would have sent the marketer back to someone else for every new audience, the dependence the product existed to remove.

Tradeoff: boolean logic is demanding. The design shows the structure instead of hiding it behind a segment name, so a rule can be read and questioned before it goes live.

Shown in the case study: Edit audience and rules.

4. Tests and results where the decision is made

The decision: A/B variations, the traffic split, goals and results sit next to the campaign. The campaign list carries devices, A/B, users, impressions, conversions, conversion rate and Live or Paused status, and an Analytics view tracks impressions over time.

Why: a message nobody measures is a guess. Keeping the numbers beside the campaign closes the loop from build to learn. A separate testing product was the alternative; it would have split that loop across two logins.

Tradeoff: dense views. Consistent columns in the campaign list and repeated variation blocks in the editor make the density comparable at a glance.

Shown in the case study: AB testing; Admin.

What shipped, and what it did

Everything in the case study shipped and ran with paying clients while Rotem was at Adoric. In those years Adoric optimized conversion for more than 100 clients, and campaigns built on the platform improved website conversion rates by 5 to 15 percent.

Among the clients whose campaigns ran on the platform in those years: Wix, eToro, Mako, P&G (Pampers), Always (Devchat), CrunchMind, Israel Post (דואר ישראל), Pelephone (פלאפון), 888.com, MAC, Super-Pharm, Webpals, Yad2, StingTV, Hightech Zone, Behatzdaa (בהצדעה), Simplex, Everything5pounds, iStore, eTeacher, Strauss Water, HaMiktzoanim (המקצוענים), Landwer Coffee, Makari, VetDepot, Ladila, PC365, Ofran, Purple Leads, Igor Solo Ads, Chefies, Studio 6B, Netcraft Academy, AvaTrade, Lametayel, SeanRent, Ziv Kitchens, Showbox, Haboreret, iForex, Mishloha (משלוחה), FILA, Groupon and Toyota.

The facts on this page come from Rotem’s own account, the Adoric case study and his career timeline. The figures inside the interface screenshots are demo content, not results.

Frequently asked questions

What did Rotem Elimelech design for Adoric?

The whole product around an early engine: the WYSIWYG editor for popups, banners and personalized onsite messages, the audience targeting and display rules, the A/B testing with goals and analytics, and the campaign management and account administration, as Partner and VP Products from 2014 to 2017.

Is this case relevant to a conversion rate optimization or website personalization product?

Yes. Adoric is a CRO and personalization platform: marketers build a message, target it by visitor behavior, source, language or membership, test variations and read the results, all without a developer. Campaigns built on it improved website conversion rates by 5 to 15 percent.

Did Rotem design the editor, the rule builder and the analytics dashboard himself?

Yes. He owned research, product definition, UX and UI design for the canvas editor, the AND/OR condition builder, the A/B testing panel, the campaign list with its conversion metrics and the Analytics view; the brand was created with the team.

Is Rotem available to design a similar SaaS product for marketers?

Yes, as a freelance product designer, on a retainer or for a defined project: a no-code editor, a rule builder, an experimentation feature or the full product from research to UI. Availability and rates are on his profile.

Work with Rotem

For a team building a visual editor, a configurable B2B product or a marketing platform, Rotem brings the whole product process, research, product definition, UX, branding and UI design, and the experience of taking a prototype to a product that more than 100 companies paid for. Availability, rates and how he works are on his profile.

Discuss a project · All case studies