Redesigning financial workflows for security and clarity

During my internship at a global financial services company, I worked to modernize how internal teams managed and delivered client documents. Security and compliance were critical for this three-month design phase.

My role evolved from creating service blueprints to owning the access management prototype. I collaborated with a UX researcher, senior designer, developers, and subject matter experts across the project.

Due to NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement), all sensitive data has been blurred or replaced, and parts of the interface were redesigned to maintain confidentiality.

Duration

3 months

My role

UX & service design

Client

Global B2B financial firm

problem

Strengthen controls and modernize a manual workflow

Stakeholders approached our team with a clear concern:

A sensitive internal workflow for preparing financial documents was highly manual and difficult to oversee.

They wanted more confidence that the process aligned with internal control expectations and could stand up to external scrutiny.

Research

What we uncovered about how the work actually flowed

Through interviews and observation sessions with subject‑matter experts and internal team members, we learned that the high‑level compliance concern was rooted in a few concrete process issues:

The process spanned multiple tools, making it hard for managers to track what was sent, when and by whom

There were no clear accountability checkpoints or systematized document organization

Documents required peer review before client delivery, but the manual request process made it easy to miss during high-volume periods

Key Decisions

How we approached it

Narrowing scope to high‑impact steps

With only three months for design and a complex domain, the team decided not to move the entire workflow into the platform at once. Instead, we focused on:

Centralizing document organization

Making it clear who uploaded what and when

Built-in document quality checkpoint before delivery

This approach delivered meaningful improvements in oversight while laying the groundwork for a broader migration.

Front‑loading research and modeling

We spent roughly half the design timeline (1.5 of 3 months) on research and collaborative mapping with subject matter experts and internal teams. This ensured:

The service blueprint accurately reflected the real process

Problem statements and success criteria were aligned across design, engineering and stakeholders

Later design decisions were grounded in real edge cases and constraints

Investing in research synthesis and shared artifacts

I analyzed and synthesized interview and observation notes with subject‑matter experts using a research repository tool and turned them into a UX research report.

Having a single, structured report helped align designers, developers and stakeholders on what we had learned and where to focus.

Condens app interface showing synthesis of user and stakeholder interview notes

Synthesizing user and stakeholder interviews in the Condens app

Condens app interface showing UX research report

UX research report summarizing key findings and insights

Blueprinting for speed and clarity

This was my first service blueprint and the team needed it early. I optimized for:

Speed

Iterating quickly with subject‑matter experts to confirm steps and avoid rework

Clarity

Asking experienced designers for feedback to make sure a complex service could be understood at a glance

This made the complex domain easier to understand and gave the team a common foundation for decision-making.

Primary user persona document blurred for confidentiality, representing core audience needs

Primary persona

Secondary user persona document blurred for confidentiality, representing additional audience segment

Supportive persona

Workflow diagram

Customer journey map visualizing user steps, touchpoints, and pain points across the experience

Journey map revealed touchpoints and challenges across the experience

Current-state service blueprint showing frontstage and backstage interactions across the workflow

Current-state blueprint mapped the existing process and exposed gaps

Co‑creating with developers and visualizing the near‑term flow

To avoid exploring ideas that could never ship, we ran ideation sessions with developers alongside designers and subject‑matter experts. This helped:

Filter out concepts that were not technically feasible within our timeframe.

Refine promising ideas early so they fit within existing systems and constraints.

Before detailed design, I mapped a near‑term service blueprint (as of a defined target date) to show how the brainstormed solution would change the current workflow. This gave the team a clear picture of what “version one” would actually look like.

How Might We diagram capturing opportunity statements from user research

How Might We (HMW) statements framed research insights as opportunities for ideas

Lean UX canvas outlining assumptions, hypotheses, and success metrics for the project

Lean UX canvas captured early assumptions to guide design

UX breadboard diagram showing screen flows and component relationships at a high level

UX breadboard outlined early flows and component relationships

Near-term service blueprint illustrating improved process with updated touchpoints and roles

Near-term-state service blueprint illustrated the improved process

Testing ideas early with SMEs and team members

Throughout the project, we held frequent feedback and usability sessions with subject‑matter experts and internal team members. These sessions were used to:

Check whether our design concepts matched how people actually worked.

Catch confusing flows or missing steps early.

Iterate on the access‑management prototype and workflow changes before development.

Regular validation kept the design grounded in reality and built confidence in the final direction.

Solution

1. Platform integration & workflow controls

Centralized uploads and history

We introduced a partial migration of the process into an internal platform, focusing on intake, organization and verification:

Team members now upload documents into a single place instead of scattering them across different locations.

Leads can see a history of uploads for each case, including who uploaded what and when.

This created a clearer picture of progress and made it easier to answer “who did what when” questions.

Account repository view showing linked files and upload dates

Repository view displaying files linked to an account with addition dates

System‑assisted checks before progression

The platform adds an extra check before work can move forward:

Confirms that required documents are present.

Flags potential issues, such as missing files or obvious mismatches.

Ensures an initial review has been marked complete.

If these conditions are not met, the system prevents the team from proceeding, turning previously manual guardrails into more reliable ones.

Document upload validation screen checking required files and flagging errors

Upload step where the system checks required documents and flags issues before files move forward

Visibility into key dates

The interface highlights relevant service periords so the team can quickly see which cases need attention, helping to avoid missed timelines.

Together, these changes improved organization, accountability and confidence in the process, while still fitting into existing ways of working.

2. Access management

To move the workflow onto the platform and scale to more users, we needed a way to control who could access which financial accounts. I designed an access management system with four core capabilities:

Flexible editing

Allow granular changes to a single account or bulk updates across several accounts.

Interface for editing a single account's settings

Use bulk edit to add or remove people across multiple accounts in a single action

Animated demonstration of bulk editing to add multiple new users to accounts

Manage permissions at the single‑account level when a targeted edit is required

Quick profile view

Show, at a glance, which accounts a person can access and allow adjustments from one place.

Profile view showing all accounts linked to one person, with quick access controls

Import users between accounts

Reuse access setups from one account to another so new accounts can be configured quickly.

Animated demonstration of importing users from one account to another

Copying an existing access setup to a new account to speed up configuration

Convert existing account access into distribution lists

People who already had account access became ready-to-use groups for sending documents. This eliminated manual list-building and reduced errors during time-sensitive deliveries.

Animated demonstration of converting access accounts into a distribution list

Using current account access as a ready‑made delivery list for documents

Outcome

Clearer process, stronger foundation

Shared understanding

The current‑ and near‑term service blueprints became central alignment tools, helping the team and stakeholders identify and prioritize workflow gaps

Improved accountability and organization

The new platform‑based flow increased traceability and gave leads better visibility into who uploaded which documents and when

Stronger controls, future‑ready

By centralizing uploads and adding checks, the solution reduced process risk and set up the organization to move more of the workflow into the platform over time

Strategic asset in access management

The access‑management concept received positive feedback from internal teams and is being used as a reference for future platform work

Takeaways

What did I learn from this work?

Learning a complex domain fast

This project showed me how powerful service blueprints are for both learning a new domain and aligning a cross‑functional team. Mapping the current state gave me a structured way to understand a complex service and gave the team a neutral artifact to rally around.

Designing with engineering from day one

Bringing engineers into research and ideation paid off: they raised technical questions early, kept ideas grounded in what was feasible, and made the handoff smoother because they were already invested in the decisions.

Principles to carry into future projects

This work reinforced a few principles that apply to other complex, regulated projects:

In complex environments, delivering a focused, high‑impact slice with strong guardrails is often more valuable than trying to redesign everything at once.

Systems‑level artifacts like blueprints are active tools for prioritization and risk reduction, not just documentation.

Collaboration shapes outcomes as much as design does. Aligning designers, engineers, and experts early leads to better decisions.

Redesigning financial workflows for security and clarity

Strengthen controls and modernize a manual workflow

What we uncovered about how the work actually flowed

How we approached it

Narrowing scope to high‑impact steps

Front‑loading research and modeling

Investing in research synthesis and shared artifacts

Blueprinting for speed and clarity

Co‑creating with developers and visualizing the near‑term flow

Testing ideas early with SMEs and team members

1. Platform integration & workflow controls

Centralized uploads and history

System‑assisted checks before progression

Visibility into key dates

2. Access management

Flexible editing

Quick profile view

Import users between accounts

Convert existing account access into distribution lists

Clearer process, stronger foundation

What did I learn from this work?

A showcase of my latest work — designed with purpose and impact

I'm just an email away