Three systems for one job, each with its own logic.
Throughout, I worked closely with the client, the backend and frontend developers, the PM and QA, so every idea was checked against technical limits before it reached the screen.
Research: what the business needs, and how others solve it
I started with interviews: the goals of the merge, the technical limits, and how we would know it worked. Then I looked at direct and indirect competitors — how they structure a CRM, build analytics dashboards and handle traffic.
Foundation: one workflow, a view for each user type, two themes
Before redesigning any flow I mapped what each user type needs. Everyone works in one shared workflow and sees only the fields and functions that matter to them; admins decide which parameters are open or restricted for each type. Light and dark themes went into the system from the first component, because people sit in this CRM for hours.
Then, module by module, in parallel with the team:
The leads table: from a segment to an action
Media buyers segment leads all day, across many parameters at once. I designed a filter that combines conditions with AND / OR, pinned first and last columns, so checkboxes and actions stay in view on wide tables, and bulk actions for the selected rows — assign, change status, export.
Dashboards from zero
The product had no dashboards, so this was the biggest gap. I talked to the client about which metrics matter most and which ones users need, then designed the dashboards to be customizable — cards to add and arrange, around each person’s goals.
A better version of every other flow
In each flow I looked for what slowed people down and proposed a fix, from lead context to reporting.
One CRM people can rely on.
A fragmented, inefficient system became a clear, structured product: unified workflows, customizable dashboards and better usability let people work faster, decide better and shape the tool around their own way of working. There are no effect metrics yet; this is what changed for the people inside it:
