Design Brief
Design a workflow as part of a larger platform. Users are currently conducting business in a round-about way and this workflow should aim to streamline the process.

Role & Contribution
I worked on planning user research, conducting interviews, service design blueprinting/ story mapping, prototype user testing, presenting prototypes, and working with developers to flesh out prototypes.

Deliverables

• High Fidelity Prototype

• Pilot Release

01. Identifying the problem

02. Understanding the workflow

03. Deciding a path forward

04. Determining streamline patterns

Under the guidance of a design researcher, I created an interview plan with my product manager. We conducted 12 user interviews to understand current workflow usage and pain points. From energy to commercial real estate, we learned about what made each industry special in the type of workflow they were accustomed to. Some key learnings was that through the different industries and legacy systems, there were 4 unique identified workflows that we decided needed to be condensed into one streamline workflow that lived on PT. In addition, we were able to identify key action needs that the platform would need to address as well as confirmed with our assumption that Commercial Real Estate was the hairiest industry.

People Problem:

As data sources are fragmented and workflows vary amongst different industries, there is no cohesive way of working at Capital One. 

Goal:

In order to transform Portfolio Tracker, a view only space, to Comet, an action based platform, we need to deliver a comprehensive workflow that will cut down on time spent by our associates to tackle these tasks.

Challenges:

• There are multiple industries and multiple stakeholders involved each with their own unique pain points. 

• Different stakeholders are the main user at different points in the workflow. 

• There is a $95B lending portfolio on the line if we cause a workflow inefficiency. 

In order to understand the existing platform, I conducted an information architecture audit of Portfolio Tracker (PT).

From the interviews, we were able to map out a flow diagram of a streamlined version of how our users were creating proposals today. A proposal being a well packaged document that includes all of the necessary ingredients such as what is the action being taken (is it a renewal, an extension, a new deal), the included deal and facilities ( which a "deal" is a specific, one-time financial transaction or arrangement between the bank and a client, while a "facility" is an ongoing line of credit or credit arrangement that provides continuous access to funds within a specified limit), and previous risk rating. The underwriter then takes this proposal and gifts it to approvals.

We also mapped out questions that the user might have at each stage of the proposal that stemmed from the interviews.

We ended with two potential ways of designing for multiple workflow patterns. A, which mimicked the way that TurboTax handles information-heavy workflows, in an easy to digest, piece by piece way. B, which mimicked the way that a build your own form would allow a user to add whatever ingredient they so desired, being the most flexible form of workflow allowing it to be adaptable to any industry and use case. Through an AB testing exercise conducted on the same previous group of catalysts, we found there to be an overwhelming preference for the turbo tax way. It was more streamline, there was less possibility for creative interpretation, and users fumbled a lot more in test B with the unfamiliar UI.  

With that, we marched forward with the turbotax design. We identified all of the critical pieces/ attributes that belonged in the proposal process. With our product manager partner, we identified the first best piece to execute: an extension to an existing loan. 

Please reach out to e.soosea@gmail.com for a full project process walkthrough!