Enabling a dev team to design feasible, intuitive enterprise features efficiently using design thinking

I cannot share the actual designs or features from my previous work. Instead, this case study highlights how I improved the design process within the team to enable more efficient and collaborative design. All visuals are self-created to illustrate my approach.

Our team built custom ERP add-ons for a 20K-employee client to manage complex HR workflows. Since we didn’t have designers, solution consultants handled specifications. However, design was not well understood and was considered a relatively low priority.

Engineers

Develop features

Solution Consultants

Communicate with clients to define specifications

Project Managers

Manage project progress

No Designers

Design was not treated as a distinct role

As an engineer with a passion for design, I took on the challenge of solving this problem using design thinking. Due to project constraints, I needed to adapt the approach rather than follow every step. I discussed with the team to gather insights on what could improve efficiency the most and defined 3 key focus areas.

Based on the new strategy, I updated the design process. Here’s what the revised process looks like.

Mapping the current and ideal workflows made it easier for clients and our team to align on the target flow. I researched common flowchart documentation methods and tools, adopted draw.io, and established a consistent format with simple flowchart rules.

🔨 Tool selection

I evaluated draw.io and Mermaid, focusing on how easily the team could learn and use the tool, and decided on draw.io.

draw.io

✅ Easy and intuitive for the team to learn

✅ Adaptable to complex workflows

👎 Requires manual work

Mermaid

✅ Reduce manual effort in creating visuals

👎 Steeper learning curve

👎 Charts become messy when workflows are complex

I replaced the spreadsheet-based wireframes with Figma prototypes. Because the workflow we managed was highly complex, using Figma alone wasn’t enough to fully capture how the features should function. To address this, we complemented the prototypes with a text-based specification document that mapped the client’s requirements to the functionality of our add-on features.

In the text-based specification document, each requirement was paired with its corresponding specification.

📢 Guiding adoption

Since our team didn’t have dedicated designers, I focused on simplifying design tasks to make the new process practical and sustainable. I leveraged existing frameworks and resources, and shared design knowledge through presentations and documentation.

Used Material Design

Reduced the cost of building a custom design system while maintaining design quality.

Adopted UI kit

Used the Vuetify UI kit to save time and stay aligned with pre-existing components.

Shared knowledge

Held presentations and created guides to introduce design knowledge to the team.

I set up internal meetings before sharing designs with clients to ensure feasibility. These sessions provided opportunities for engineers to share technical limitations and for solution consultants to contribute their understanding of client workflows and requirements.

During pilot testing, we applied the new development process to design several new features, reducing communication time between developers and consultants by about 30 minutes per ticket. I left the company to pursue my master’s but would have continued improving and evaluating the process if I had stayed.

I learned how to make the design process practical and sustainable for a team of non-designers by leveraging existing frameworks, resources, and sharing design knowledge. This project took place in 2023, and if I were to revisit it today, I would explore incorporating AI tools to accelerate and enhance the process.