00 How to read this
This document synthesises three independent card-sort studies into a single information architecture recommendation. It treats PADI's proposed sitemap as the baseline and uses the research to refine within the six-section structure the client has already committed to.
What this is built on
What the synthesis can and can't do
The three studies were run with deliberately different card sets — each tailored to its audience. Only 7 cards appear in all three studies, so card-level cross-audience comparison is mostly impossible. What the data does support is structural comparison — how each audience organises content into themes. That structural comparison is the analytical backbone of this synthesis.
What "agreement" means here
When this report says "all three audiences agree" on a theme, it means each audience independently produced a coherent cluster around that theme — not that the same cards were placed identically. When it says "audiences diverge", it means the same content type lands in structurally different positions across studies.Each finding is tagged: Research-validated when supported by all three studies, Partial support when 2 of 3 agree, Design recommendation when the data is insufficient and design judgement carries the call.
The brief the client gave us
Before any card sort ran, the client proposed a sitemap with six primary sections: Diving Experiences, Courses, PADI Club, Travel (with two variants), Conservation, and PADI Pros. This synthesis honours that six-section structure as a fixed constraint and refines within it.
The two travel variants the client proposed are:
- Variant A: A narrower "Dive Shops and Guides" primary section, with travel commerce on a separate domain (PADI Travel) — assumes travel products cannot be purchased on padi.com.
- Variant B: A broader "Travel and Dive Guides" section that integrates travel commerce — assumes a unified cart, checkout and UX with padi.com.
Section 5 resolves this with a research-based recommendation. Section 6 shows both menu systems so either commercial path can be operationalised.
Mobile-first, throughout
The recommended menu is designed for a ~375px viewport first; desktop is the enhancement. Section 7 is the interactive mobile prototype.
01 Where the three audiences agree
Three structural decisions are validated independently by all three studies. These are the load-bearing pillars of the IA — the parts of the client's sitemap the data most strongly supports.
Travel as a primary destination
Research-validatedEvery audience treats travel-related content as a major, primary destination — and treats it as its own coherent area, not scattered across other topics.
| Audience | Cluster | Cohesion | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Potential | Travel & Where to Dive | 49% (12 cards) | Sites, shops, resorts, regions, travel planning |
| Active | Travel & Where to Dive | 73% (8 cards) | Tightest cluster in the active study — a clear "where do I dive next" mental bucket |
| PRO | Travel & Adventures | 62% (16 cards) | Broadest cluster — also absorbs community forums and the Adventures app |
Conservation as a standalone destination
Research-validatedConservation content forms a coherent, high-cohesion cluster in every study. It is not peripheral — even potential divers, the audience least invested in it, formed a clean conservation cluster.
| Audience | Cluster | Cohesion | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Potential | Environment & Conservation | 64% (3 cards) | Second-tightest cluster after the Diving Club; AWARE, Conservation Activities, Global Plastics |
| Active | Conservation & Ocean | 62% (7 cards) | Second-tightest cluster; Adopt The Blue, Marine Debris, Shark & Ray Protection |
| PRO | Conservation | 75% (11 cards) | Second-tightest cluster in the study; the strongest conservation read of any audience |
A coherent training cluster exists for every audience
Research-validatedEvery audience formed a clean training cluster — content about learning to dive, courses, certifications and specialties. The agreement is on the existence of this cluster; the disagreement is about its boundaries (see §3).
| Audience | Cluster | Cohesion | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Potential | Learn / Get Started | 46% (9 cards) | Discover Scuba, Scuba Basics, Learn to Scuba Dive, Certification Levels |
| Active | Certifications & Training | 57% (18 cards) | Open Water through Master Scuba + ALL specialties + the full pro pathway |
| PRO | Courses & Training | 61% (18 cards) | Open Water through Master Scuba + specialties + EFR — pro pathway separated out |
"Find a Dive Shop" earns its utility-nav slot
Partial supportAcross all three studies, dive-shop locator content surfaced as immediate-action — content people want to reach quickly rather than browse to. The client sitemap places "Find a PADI Dive Shop" in the top utility bar; this matches the research intent.
02 Where the three audiences diverge
Four structural decisions are genuinely contested across audiences. The IA has to make explicit choices here — there is no compromise that satisfies all three mental models. Each item below frames the tension, the per-audience evidence, and the resolution recommended by this synthesis.
1. Where does the Pro pathway live?
Design recommendationThe tension: For active divers, going pro is the next step on the training continuum — they grouped all certifications, specialties, AND the Divemaster→Instructor track into a single cluster (57% cohesion, 18 cards). For PROs, the pro pathway is the single most cohesive cluster across the entire programme (77%) — a domain in its own right, distinct from beginner training. Potential divers don't engage with pro content at all.
| Audience | Mental model | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Potential | Doesn't exist for them | "Become a PADI Pro" had very low salience in the funnel-stage audience |
| Active | One training continuum: Learn → Pro | 57% cohesion when learning + pro content are clustered together; splitting them weakens the model |
| PRO | Distinct pro domain | 77% cohesion — the tightest cluster of any audience study; Divemaster → Course Director is a self-contained progression |
Recommendation: Honour the client's choice to give PADI Pros its own primary section. The PRO data is the strongest signal in the programme (77% cohesion, 0.94 cophenetic correlation), and a peer-level entry serves them properly. But also include "Become a PADI Pro" as a prominent card inside the Courses section — that's the active-diver journey into the pro funnel, and it must be findable from the training continuum, not only from the pro destination.
This is the rare case where the IA should deliberately duplicate a destination: one entry for PROs as a peer audience, one entry inside Courses as the journey step active divers expect.
2. Where does PADI Club live?
Design recommendationThe tension: Three audiences, three placements. Potential divers see Club as its own destination (67% cohesion — their second-tightest cluster, even though just 2 cards). Active divers fold Club into a membership/cards layer alongside eCards and the Adventures app. PROs merge Club entirely with Brand into one cluster (70%).
| Audience | Where Club content went |
|---|---|
| Potential | Its own cluster (67%) — "The Diving Club" |
| Active | Cards & Membership cluster (56%) — Join Club + benefits clustered with eCards, certification cards, the Adventures app, the community forum |
| PRO | PADI Brand & Club (70%) — Club content clustered with brand, history, partners, ambassadors |
Recommendation: Keep PADI Club as a primary section (matching the client sitemap) but understand what it has to deliver: for potential divers it's a destination ("what is the Club, should I join?"); for active divers it's an account/benefits layer; for PROs it sits next to brand. The primary slot is justified by the potential-diver evidence. The page itself needs to surface different things to different audiences — see the menu system in §6 for how this resolves.
3. "Diving Experiences" vs "Courses" — two sections or one?
Design recommendationThe tension: The client sitemap proposes "Diving Experiences" and "Courses" as two separate primary sections. Diving Experiences emphasises activity ("Learn to Dive", "Dive Better", "Become a PADI Pro", "Unique Adventures", "Family Diving"). Courses emphasises the catalog ("Activity", "Type", "PADI Club discounts").
The research doesn't support a split. No audience sorted training content into two groups. Active divers and PROs each produced one large training cluster. Potential divers produced one Learn cluster plus separate "Ways to Dive" content.
The split appears to be a conversion vs. catalog distinction (high-intent funnel landing pages vs. SKU-style browse) — which is a commercial decision, not a research one.
Recommendation: Honour the client's two-section split as a constraint, but make the relationship between them explicit in the IA:
- Diving Experiences = the funnel/landing layer. Audience-acquisition pages: "Learn to Dive", "Dive Better", "Become a PADI Pro", "Family Diving", "Marine Life". Optimised for intent matching and conversion.
- Courses = the catalog. Filterable course list by activity (Scuba, Freediving, Mermaid, EFR) and type (eLearning, Certification, Specialty, Refresher). Optimised for browse and discovery.
- Every Diving Experiences page must link directly to the relevant Course catalog filter. Every Course catalog page must offer the funnel landing page for that activity. The two sections share content, but serve different intents.
This refinement preserves the client's six-section structure while addressing the research gap.
4. "Ways to Dive" — primary content for whom?
Partial supportThe tension: Potential divers formed a distinct "Ways to Dive" cluster (6 cards — Snorkeling, Freediving, Mermaid, Family Diving, etc.). For active divers it shrank to 3 cards (50% cohesion — the weakest cluster). For PROs it's absorbed entirely into training.
The client sitemap puts these activities inside Courses → Experiences AND inside Diving Experiences. That double-placement is awkward but reasonable — for beginners they're a category of thing-to-explore; for everyone else they're a category of training-to-take.
Recommendation: Keep them in both places as the client sitemap proposes. Use the audience signal: Diving Experiences pages should present these as activities ("What is Mermaid Diving?", "Try Freediving"); Course catalog entries should present them as trainable specialties. Same content, different framing.
03 Sitemap critique — section by section
Walking through each of the client's six primary sections: what the research validates, what to refine, and what to challenge. Concrete proposals, not generic critique.
1. Diving Experiences
Design recommendationClient proposal: Primary section. Sub-items: Learn to Dive, Dive Better, Become a PADI Pro, Unique Adventures, Family Diving, Marine Life.
Research read: The research doesn't directly validate "Diving Experiences" as a label — no audience used those words. What it does validate is the funnel intent: potential divers' "Learn / Get Started" cluster (9 cards, 46% cohesion) maps cleanly to this section's purpose. For active divers the same content sits inside Certifications & Training.
Refinements:
- Keep the section. Its job is intent landing — bring people in by what they want to do.
- "Become a PADI Pro" appearing here AND in Courses AND in PADI Pros is intentional duplication — keep all three.
- Consider promoting "Marine Life" or making it part of Conservation — the research showed an emotional/wellbeing cluster ("Connect with the Ocean", "Discover the Underwater World") that's separate from training. Marine Life leans toward that wellbeing space.
2. Courses
Design recommendationClient proposal: Primary section with a course catalog page and three facets — Experiences, Activity, Type — plus a PADI Club facet.
Research read: The training cluster is the largest cluster for active divers (18 cards, 57%) and PROs (18 cards, 61%). The catalog/facet structure is a content-modelling decision the card sort can't directly speak to — none of the audiences sorted by "Type = eLearning / Certification / Specialty / Refresher". They sorted by activity and outcome.
Refinements:
- Keep the section. Demote "Type" as a primary facet — surface it as a filter, not as a top-level browse axis.
- Promote "Activity" as the primary browse axis: Scuba, Freediving, Mermaid, Technical, EFR. This matches how every audience sorted.
- The "PADI Club" facet (showing club-discounted courses) is a smart commercial move — surface this prominently for logged-in club members but secondary for everyone else.
- Include "Become a PADI Pro" as a clear card inside Courses (the active-diver journey expects this; see §3 item 1).
3. PADI Club
Partial supportClient proposal: Primary section. Sub-items: Learn about PADI Club, Join PADI Club, Access Club Benefits.
Research read: Justified by the potential-diver data (67% cohesion, second-tightest cluster). Less justified by active and PRO data, where club content merged with membership or brand. The primary slot is defensible because the audience least familiar with PADI most needs the standalone destination.
Refinements:
- Keep the primary slot.
- The page must serve three audience modes: (a) acquisition — "what is this, should I join?" for potential divers; (b) account — benefits, eCards, member-only content for active divers who are members; (c) brand-adjacent — for PROs who see Club as part of the PADI identity layer.
- Personalise based on auth state: logged-out visitors see the join/learn flow; logged-in members see the benefits/account flow.
4. Travel / Dive Shops and Guides
Research-validatedClient proposal: Primary section in both variants. Variant A scope: dive shop locator, dive guides, destinations, dive sites (no travel commerce). Variant B scope: all of A plus Travel sub-section with Certification Adventures, Fun Dives, Resorts, Liveaboards.
Research read: The research is unambiguous — every audience formed a coherent travel/locations cluster. Active divers' 73% cohesion is the tightest single-study cluster across the programme. The cluster included resorts, liveaboards, and shops — meaning the data supports Variant B (integrated) over Variant A (separated).
Refinements: See §5 for the full Variant A vs B analysis. Both menu systems are proposed in §6.
5. Conservation
Research-validatedClient proposal: Primary section. Sub-items: Mission, Actions, PADI AWARE Foundation.
Research read: Validated by all three audiences. PROs especially treat this as a strong, standalone destination (75% cohesion). The Mission / Actions / AWARE Foundation breakdown is sensible — the research showed Conservation content is coherent enough that internal sub-structure is straightforward.
Refinements:
- Keep as proposed.
- One small move: consider relocating "Adopt The Blue" (active-diver data) and "Marine Debris Initiative" (active + PRO data) here as Actions — they cluster with Conservation in both later studies.
6. PADI Pros
Research-validatedClient proposal: Primary section. Sub-items: Become a PADI Pro (with sub-tree), Dive Centers and Resorts, Pro Sign in (Pro Portal).
Research read: Strongly validated. The PRO study's 77% cohesion on the Professional Pathway is the highest cluster cohesion of any study in the programme. Treating PROs as a peer audience in the primary nav matches both the data and the client's intent.
Refinements:
- Keep as proposed.
- The Pro Sign In should be visually distinct — the PRO audience expects a destination, not a sub-menu item. Treat it as the entry point to the Pro Portal sub-site.
- "Dive Centers and Resorts" is a B2B audience (people running dive centres). Consider whether this needs its own peer-level entry or stays as a sub-item — depends on how PADI sees the operator audience.
04 Travel: Variant A vs Variant B
The client's two sitemap variants differ only on travel. Variant A treats PADI Travel as a separate domain (commerce off padi.com); Variant B treats travel commerce as integrated into padi.com. The research can speak to this — and it points clearly in one direction.
"Dive Shops and Guides" as the primary section. Travel products live on a different domain with a separate UI/UX.
In primary nav:
- Dive Shops and Guides
In utility nav (top bar):
- PADI Travel (off-domain link)
Sub-items under Dive Shops and Guides:
- Find a Dive Shop · Explore Dive Guides · Destinations · Explore Dive Sites · Dive Site Pages
"Travel and Dive Guides" as the primary section. Travel cart and checkout consistent with padi.com.
In primary nav:
- Travel and Dive Guides
In utility nav:
- —
Sub-items under Travel and Dive Guides:
- Find a Dive Shop · Explore Dive Guides · Destinations · Explore Dive Sites · Dive Site Pages
- Travel: Certification Adventures, Fun Dives, Resorts, Liveaboards
What the research says
Every audience formed a coherent travel cluster, and in two of the three studies, that cluster included the content Variant A would split off:
| Audience | What clustered with travel/dive locations | Cohesion |
|---|---|---|
| Potential | Travel destinations, planning, dive sites, dive shops — coherent group, but no resort/liveaboard cards in their card set | 49% |
| Active | Dive sites, dive shops, dive resorts, liveaboards, regions, travel inspiration, local events — all in ONE cluster | 73% |
| PRO | Travel inspiration, dive sites, shops, resorts, liveaboards, fun dives, the Adventures app, community forums — all in ONE cluster | 62% |
The active-diver cluster is the single tightest cluster across the entire programme (73% cohesion — higher than any cluster in any other study), and it explicitly includes resorts and liveaboards. The data is telling us users treat dive guidance and trip booking as one mental journey: where do I dive next? What does it cost? How do I book? Splitting the informational layer from the transactional layer onto two domains creates a seam right through that journey.
Research recommendation: Variant B (integrated)
Of the two variants, Variant B is the one the research supports. Active divers (the audience most likely to book a trip) treat dive locations and travel products as one bucket. Forcing them across a domain boundary mid-journey adds friction without serving any user need the research found.
That said, this is not a pure UX decision — it depends on whether PADI is able and willing to take payments for trips on padi.com. If commercial constraints lock the answer to Variant A, the research-mitigation is to make the off-domain transition extremely visible and trustworthy: clear branding continuity, single sign-on, and persistent navigation back to padi.com.
What we propose
The recommended menu in §5 below shows both variants as toggleable views. Either commercial path can be operationalised; the menu structure for each is research-grounded. The Variant B menu is the research's natural choice; the Variant A menu is the best workable alternative if Variant B isn't commercially feasible.