IFS · 2025

Making cross‑team collaboration simpler and more effective.

+60% Improvement in Cross‑Functional Clarity WAY OF WORKING

Role: Senior Lead UX Designer
Duration: 4 months
Year: 2025
Client: IFS

Overview

Project overview

When the Asset and Service teams merged, each brought its own way of working into Stage 3 (Design & Validation) of IFS's 7 Stage Development Process. Together with three other UX designers, I unified these workflows into a scalable, repeatable framework that defined what each role delivers at that stage.

It improved clarity, reduced rework, and strengthened collaboration across Program Managers, Product Managers, Software Engineers, Quality Assurance members, and UX members.

The problem: As the teams merged, Stage 3 exposed deep inconsistencies: Each team followed a different workflow, tooling approach, and set of expectations.
The decision: Defined what PMs, PGMs, UX, SE, QA, and Architecture must deliver at each stage.
The outcome: +60% Increase in Cross‑Functional Clarity

Collaborated with

JDJanani DabareSenior Lead UX Designer
NANadeeka AthukoralaLeak UX Desinger
JSJakob SällLead UX Designer

The challenge

Understanding the problem

As the teams merged, Stage 3 exposed deep inconsistencies:

Each team followed a different workflow, tooling approach, and set of expectations.
PMs and PGMs lacked shared visibility into UX and design processes.
UX was often involved late, which led to rework and unclear requirements.
There was no common view of what good looks like for Stage 3 across roles.

These gaps came up repeatedly in discussions about request clarification, roadmap alignment, and design validation.

Key question: How might we give every role a shared, clear view of Stage 3 so teams align early and avoid rework?

The approach

How I approached it

02Gather inputSpoke with PMs, PGMs, and engineering leads about late requirements, unclear handoffs, and dependency issues.
04Map touchpointsDefined the expected touchpoints: Clarity Syncs, Playback Sessions, Demos, and alignment cadences.

01Discover

01DiscoverRan recurring syncs and research sessions to see how teams operate, uncover workflow gaps, and align expectations for Stage 3.
02Gather inputSpoke with PMs, PGMs, and engineering leads about late requirements, unclear handoffs, and dependency issues.
03SynthesiseUsed interviews, empathy mapping, and affinity mapping to consolidate insights.
04Map touchpointsDefined the expected touchpoints: Clarity Syncs, Playback Sessions, Demos, and alignment cadences.
05Design the frameworkDefined deliverables per role and stage, with annotated flows and rationale documentation.

Swipe for more steps →

The solution

What I designed

Defined what PMs, PGMs, UX, SE, QA, and Architecture must deliver at each stage.
Introduced annotated flows and rationale documentation to ensure transparency.
Clarity Syncs for early alignment on requirements
Playback Sessions to validate design direction with stakeholders
Design + Engineering Demos for shared context and realistic feedback
Incorporate AI into the workflow

Visual designs

Design highlights

01 / 01Presenting the findings to PMs, PGMs, UX, SE, QAs

Impact

Measurable outcomes

+60%Increase in Cross‑Functional Clarity
70%Reduction in Rework Across Design & Engineering
100%Workflow Adoption Across Asset & Service Teams( 200+ Employees)
70%Improvement in Stakeholder Confidence

" I think this is a good ground breaking work that you have done that we can apply for for the future way of working as well."
JO
Johan Olofsson
Principal Program Manager