Unlock·4 min

Leads Management B2B System

Lead lifecycle states
Lead lifecycle statesA focused view of the original lead-management component.Open full design

Challenge

Dense tables and inconsistent patterns made it difficult for requesters and providers to see progress and identify the next action.

Strategy

I audited the journeys, reorganized navigation and made request status visible within the existing data model and engineering constraints.

Results

A delivered redesign and a post-delivery heatmap review that exposed a further opportunity to improve primary actions.

My role
Lead product designer; end-to-end UX/UI revamp, system setup and delivery support
Scope
Requester, provider and admin journeys; navigation, onboarding and request status
Period
Post-delivery review: late 2023
RESEARCH TO EXPERIENCE

Make progress visible. Make action deliberate.

I led the UX/UI revamp across requester, provider and admin journeys while working within the existing data model and APIs.

  1. Find the friction

    Approximately three weeks of walkthroughs, requirement reviews, monitored sessions and heuristic evaluation.

  2. Prioritize the redesign

    Navigation, onboarding guidance and visible request progress.

  3. Learn after delivery

    A late-2023 heatmap review exposed competing calls to action.

DECISION 01

Promote status from a label to a journey.

Dense tables obscured progress. I made the lifecycle explicit so a request could be understood as a sequence with a current step.

The lead lifecycle
The lead lifecycleStages from submission through review in the original design.Open full design
Instead of

Making people infer progress from a table of labels.

I prioritized

A shared progress model, with role-specific responsibilities.

DECISION 02

Show the status first. Explain it when needed.

The compact state supports scanning; expansion reveals the explanation and expected next step. Reusing the engineering component library kept the redesign deliverable.

Expanded status detail
Expanded status detailThe expanded state explains the pending review and expected next step.Open full design
DECISION 03

A useful status still needs an obvious next action.

The post-delivery review found attention on cards but weak CTA performance. Competing actions became a refinement priority rather than a claim of proven uplift.

COMPETING EMPHASIS
ActionActionAction

Several equally weighted routes split focus.

REFINEMENT DIRECTION
Primary actionDetails

One primary action; supporting information stays secondary.

Illustration of the action-priority principle identified after delivery. Not a shipped before-and-after comparison.

Results

The redesign made request progress and milestones explicit while retaining the existing data model and APIs. A post-delivery heatmap review revealed a further priority: reduce competing calls to action and clarify the next step.

What I carried forward

Action priority should be established before visual polish. A stronger status model still needs an obvious, consistent next action.