Redesigning Without Rebuilding:

UX-Led Improvements to Value Stream

Role: Sole UX Designer
Timeframe: 2 Sprints
Collaborators: Product Manager, Dev Lead, Customer Enablement Team, QA, Frontend Developers, External Customers
Tools: Figma, Miro, Teams

Overview

The original Value Stream feature was designed as a view-only interface, but during monthly user and product meetings, we repeatedly heard from customers who wanted an edit mode. However, those sessions were often dominated by louder voices and managers, rather than actual end users, making it difficult to get a clear understanding of their needs.

In my first few months, I reached out to the Lead of the Customer Enablement team and gradually built trust through internal design reviews. This collaboration led to one-on-one sessions with real users, where I finally grasped how the feature was being used in practice.

At that time, there was a disconnect between the product team and Customer Enablement, resulting in a lack of feedback and unclear requirements for the developers. They had built the editing feature using flyout panels, which proved ineffective because some sections of the Value Stream were interconnected.

My role was to improve the usability of what had already been created without wasting development effort. I concentrated on making the editing experience more intuitive and worked closely with the development lead and product manager to identify changes we could implement without overhauling the backend.

Goals

• Improve the Value Stream edit experience using what we already had

• Talk to real users to understand how they actually use the feature

• Close the gap between Product, Enablement, and Development teams

• Make the editing process clearer and easier to use

• Stay within technical constraints and avoid unnecessary rework

My Role

• Set up and ran one-on-one user testing with real customers

• Built relationships with the Enablement team to access feedback channels

• Facilitated design workshops with the dev lead and product manager

• Proposed and iterated on design changes to improve clarity

• Helped align teams on what users needed and what was feasible to deliver

Process Highlights

1. Getting Closer to Real Users

Our monthly meetings didn’t provide a complete picture, so I contacted the VP of the Customer Enablement team. I participated in her internal design reviews, actively listened, and shared my work early on, which helped build trust. Eventually, she assisted me in connecting with some of their users for direct feedback.

2. Identifying the Disconnect

There was a significant gap between what users needed and what was being built. The development team had to make educated guesses without user stories or concrete examples. They implemented flyout panels for editing, but this approach didn’t work well when different sections were linked.

3. Designing Within Constraints

Initially, I suggested moving away from flyouts and allowing users to edit directly in context. This change would enable users to see the part they were working on. However, after further discussions with the development team, it became apparent that this would require substantial modifications to the codebase and wasn’t feasible then.

I then shifted my focus. I organised a workshop with leads from development, product, and QA to explore ways to enhance usability without requiring major rewrites. We arrived at a second design proposal that maintained the current structure while introducing clearer messaging and subtle interaction tweaks to guide users more effectively through the editing flow.

4. Working Through It Together

I conducted a workshop with the development lead and product manager to identify what improvements we could make without significant backend changes. We agreed to retain the existing structure while enhancing messaging to help users understand what they were editing, especially when working with capability instances.

Outcomes

• More intuitive editing without rebuilding the feature from scratch

• Better alignment between product, development, and enablement

• Real user feedback guided design decisions

• Clearer editing interaction that worked within technical limits

• Stronger collaboration across teams

Reflection

This project reminded me how important it is to get beyond the surface. The loudest voices in a meeting don’t always reflect the real problems, and in B2B, it’s easy to overlook the actual users.

By connecting with the Enablement team and building trust, I was able to surface insights we’d been missing. The constraints pushed me to be creative and collaborative; even minor improvements made a big difference.

If I had more time and resources, I would’ve loved to test with a broader range of users and get involved earlier in the planning process. But overall, this project helped bring teams together and made the product a bit more user-friendly, one step at a time.