Overview
The Challenge
The team lacked a holistic view of current user behavior. Limited visibility into workflows, stakeholder misalignment, and an unclear product direction made it difficult to agree on what to improve next.
The design question
How might we better understand users’ workflows and challenges to identify meaningful opportunities for improving Optima? Our goal was to create a shared understanding of user needs and product opportunities before committing to the next design iteration.
My Role
Research
Moderated task-based usability testing
We tested with five Optima users: three internal solution engineers and two external customers, with varied experience levels and job functions. The Product Manager, Engineering team, and Design team were stakeholders in the study.
Participants completed realistic workflows using provided files while thinking aloud. Sessions combined pre-interview questions, task observation, and follow-up discussion to understand not only whether tasks were completed, but where people hesitated or needed reassurance.
Track behavior with a rainbow sheet
Each participant was assigned a color and a label from P1 to P5. We recorded their behavior step by step in a shared spreadsheet, making recurring friction and differences in task success easier to compare.
Synthesize patterns into insights
We tagged observations into themes, clustered pain points, and generated summary insight cards. Scanning across participants helped distinguish recurring issues from individual observations.
Three recurring issues
Workflow bottlenecks affected task completion. Navigation and information architecture issues appeared across participants. Terminology conflicted with users’ mental models, reducing confidence as they moved through the product.
Design Process
Compare effort and impact across teams
I created matrix maps to translate research findings into possible next steps. Working with the Product Manager, Project Lead, and Developer Lead, we evaluated user pain points, implementation effort, and potential impact.
We compared the UX team’s placements with the product team’s independent assessment, then layered the maps to reveal agreement and disagreement. Opportunities both teams considered high-impact and low-effort became first-phase priorities. Different assessments became discussion points rather than settled decisions.
Resolve close calls with independent scoring
The Product Manager and Design team scored each takeaway for feasibility and desirability before comparing results. Independent scoring helped avoid anchoring on another person’s judgment, while combined scores provided a basis for ranking closely matched opportunities.
Defer deliberately rather than discard
High-scoring opportunities moved into the next design iteration. Lower-scoring but valid user needs were retained on a longer-term North Star roadmap rather than dropped. This preserved the distinction between what mattered and what could be addressed immediately.
Connect user needs with technical realities
Cross-functional workshops brought managers, developers, and analysts into the process. Evaluating desirability alongside feasibility created a shared basis for discussing trade-offs and aligning the next phase of work.
The Solution
A research-backed product roadmap
The main deliverable was a shared direction for Optima’s next iteration. We synthesized the findings into actionable initiatives, evaluated impact, effort, and business value, and sequenced work into a phased roadmap.
Working with the Lead UX Designer, Product Manager, Engineering team, and business stakeholder, we organized initiatives into Must Haves, Quick Wins, and Filler Work. The roadmap made short-, medium-, and long-term work visible in one place.
A bridge from research to design
The research synthesis, prioritization maps, scorecard, and roadmap gave the team a common reference for what to build next. Immediate improvements were grounded in observed user needs, while deferred opportunities remained available for future planning.
Impact & Results
Reflection
NEXT
work