I led the design from zero, turning different procurement workflows into one configurable product used by 3,000+ companies.
S / SITUATION
Companies were buying connectivity through a consumer checkout, then handling employees and invoices in spreadsheets. Finance needed reconciliation, team managers needed assignment controls, and procurement needed permissions and billing terms. The gap affected both daily operations and the ability to serve enterprise accounts.
The first clients had different procurement models: centralized billing, regional assignment and cost-center approvals. Designing a custom admin for each would turn every new sale into another product to maintain.
T / TASK & OWNERSHIP
As the sole designer, I owned the product model, information architecture and core workflows. I worked with the PM, engineering, Sales, Finance and Legal to find what could remain stable across clients, while making procurement differences configurable.
A / ACTIONS & DESIGN DECISIONS
What connectivity is available.
Who receives it, under which permissions.
How usage maps to accounts and cost centers.
Discovery & alignment
I mapped stakeholders and worked through the meanings of plan, assignment and billing with the business and backend teams. Separating those concerns revealed the invariant: a change in billing logic should not require a new assignment flow. That model became the foundation for the information architecture.
Service & workflow design
I designed bulk CSV assignment around the spreadsheets IT teams already used, role-based access around administrative responsibilities, and billing views around reconciliation. The design connected the customer-facing interface to the operational work behind it, reducing the need to learn a new process for each task.
Product judgment
I favored configuration over client-specific builds. I also kept onboarding sales-assisted because enterprise accounts needed contracts and pricing decisions, and deferred real-time reporting where daily updates covered the primary need. Those scope choices balanced customer value, technical feasibility and maintenance cost.
R / RESULTS & BUSINESS IMPACT
The platform grew to serve more than 3,000 companies across 160+ destinations. Its shared model supported nine billing configurations without creating a separate product for every client. The value of the architecture was operational: a new procurement model could become configuration, rather than another redesign.
Platform scale and configuration outcomes. Checkout conversion is reported in its own case.
The most important design work happened in the mental model. Clear objects and responsibilities made the interface simpler and gave engineering a foundation that survived new business requirements.
I would investigate where smaller teams need lighter administration and define the evidence that would justify self-service onboarding or more frequent usage reporting.
