S’24 Internship
S’24 Internship
S’24 Internship
Est. Read through time: 3 minutes and 23 seconds
Redefining how product teams manage feedback, requests, and fixes
Overview
What is ImproveIt?
Process
Team
Stakeholders
Time
A management tool for product teams to give and receive feedback/requests within the organization
User research, initial design, usability test 1, final design, usability test 2
1 Product Designer (me) and 2 Developers
Executive Directors, VPs, and other product owners
3 months (1 of 2 projects)
Problem
The internal product feedback and support tool was cluttered and overwhelming, especially for non-tech-savvy users. Common pain points included:
Overwhelming Feedback Volume
Difficulty Finding Feedback
Cluttered Similar or Duplicate Feedback
Results
30% Faster Feedback Management
Estimated 40% Improvement in Response Efficiency
Projected 25% Reduction in Ignored Feedback
Usability tests showed that grouping similar feedback could streamline triaging, making it easier for product teams to organize, manage, and respond efficiently
It was suggested that single click bulk responses to grouped feedback could enhance communication between users and the product team, reducing friction.
With a clearer, more structured system, triaging frequency was expected to increase, ensuring fewer feedback items went unresolved
Initial Research
Overwhelmed by feedback
Trouble finding feedback
Similar or duplicate feedback
Users felt bombarded by the sheer volume of feedback and often ignored items as it all felt unmanageable (they want a multi-edit feature)
Some users struggled to locate specific feedback quickly, which would slow down their work
A lot of feedback items come in that raise the same concerns over and over again, making it cluttered and difficult to organize and prioritize
I conducted 5 interviews with power users of the platform to uncover their workflows and challenges. What I found:
Important Considerations
Power users are not tech savvy
Keep the core problem front and center
Work within the design system
I kept the platform structure consistent to avoid forcing users to relearn it, focusing instead on simplifying and clarifying interactions
Every design decision should directly solve the core user problem, keeping solutions clear and effective
The existing design system was outdated and had missing components, so I focused on improving navigation and visual clarity within the given framework while requesting additional components where they were necessary
Initial Design
Old Design: Indirect and Confusing Navigation
First Phase: Clean up the UI
New Design: Reconfigured navigation to align with stakeholders’ workflow, prioritizing status filtering
Old Design: Scattered filters
New Design: Centralized filters in the left panel, keeping only "status" open to reduce information density
Old Design: There is a lack of hierarchy on the page
New Design: Increasing font size and improving contrast from top to bottom to improve readability
Old Design: No feedback differentiation or update history, forcing users to rely on memory
New Design: Indicates which feedback items were read while emphasizing newly edited or added items for clarity
p1. Added a pre-filter page for users to select a specific product or program before entering the management screen
Second Phase: Streamlined Filtering
p2. Feedback groups to better organize similar or duplicate feedback items (completely changed after usability test)
Users wanted a way to edit or change the status of multiple feedback items at once
Third Phase: Multi-edit Feedback Items
First Usability Test
Filtering by product/program was unclear
Grouping feedback felt disconnected
Status filtering was redundant
Improve card view
Users didn’t realize they needed to select product cards, indicating a need for checkboxes or clearer selection cues
Some users only had a single product/program so filtering page will now only appear for users with multiple products or programs
Users struggled with the new grouping process for similar or duplicate feedback items, finding it unintuitive and separate from their main workflow
Users found having two status filters unnecessary, making the left panel redundant. Their feedback led to removing it for a clearer UI
Users liked card view as much as list view and wanted the improved organization applied to both
This study evaluated how users interacted with the old vs. new feedback organization and management system to identify key usability issues:
Final Design
[UPDATED] Allow users to create feedback groups by right clicking. This will give the user more context and control
First Phase: Reimagine Feedback Groups
Naming the group for better organization and add similar/duplicate items directly
Indication of which feedback items are in feedback groups
Hovering over the group icon reveals its group name and highlights related feedback items in the left panel
Group feedback selection and management section replaces the redundant status filter
Simple dropdown for users to change between open, move to triage, and close feedback item
Second Phase: Improve communication between users
Improving communication by specifying reason for closure and allowing bulk deletion of grouped feedback items
Implemented all the new features to card view
Third Phase: Improve Card View
To implement prioritization and better organization for card view, I was inspired by Trello’s layout
Created a simple Trello-like layout to test
Second (and final) Usability Test
Trello-style approach valued, but usage uncertain
Feedback grouping (for similar or duplicate items) now felt intuitive
Users appreciate the Trello-style approach and recognize its potential value but are unsure how often they would use it, as they already have existing priority management systems (may not be worth the development efforts)
Users definitely preferred the new way of organizing similar feedback items into groups. They noted it makes the feedback items a lot more organized (reduced clutter of similar or duplicate items) and the setup process seemed intuitive
Tested the new Trello-style workflow, feedback grouping, and usability fixes from the first test to evaluate clarity, ease of use, and adoption potential. Insights collected:
In terms of prioritization and the Trello-like layout, after quick brainstorming, I figured a simple pin feature would provide the same value with significantly less development
Reflection
Key Focus Areas
What I’d Do Differently
Speed & Organization: Every minute saved and every process streamlined translates to real cost savings for the company
User Excitement: Seeing stakeholders genuinely excited about the final design was a rewarding moment
Take a more holistic approach: not just improving feedback management but also optimizing the entire experience from submission to voting
While management is the core priority, a seamless user journey on both ends would have created an even stronger impact
Even though this was an internal tool, I believed it should still be easy, intuitive, and enjoyable to use. A well-designed system isn’t just functional—it should make users feel good about using it
Back to top
Redefining how product teams manage feedback, requests, and fixes
Overview
What is ImproveIt?
Process
Team
Stakeholders
Time
A management tool for product teams to give and receive feedback/requests within the organization
User research, initial design, usability test 1, final design, usability test 2
1 Product Designer (me) and 2 Developers
Executive Directors, VPs, and other product owners
3 months (1 of 2 projects)
Problem
The internal product feedback and support tool was cluttered and overwhelming, especially for non-tech-savvy users. Common pain points included:
Overwhelming Feedback Volume
Difficulty Finding Feedback
Cluttered Similar or Duplicate Feedback
Results
30% Faster Feedback Management
Estimated 40% Improvement in Response Efficiency
Projected 25% Reduction in Ignored Feedback
Usability tests showed that grouping similar feedback could streamline triaging, making it easier for product teams to organize, manage, and respond efficiently
It was suggested that single click bulk responses to grouped feedback could enhance communication between users and the product team, reducing friction.
With a clearer, more structured system, triaging frequency was expected to increase, ensuring fewer feedback items went unresolved
Initial Research
Overwhelmed by feedback
Trouble finding feedback
Similar or duplicate feedback
Users felt bombarded by the sheer volume of feedback and often ignored items as it all felt unmanageable (they want a multi-edit feature)
Some users struggled to locate specific feedback quickly, which would slow down their work
A lot of feedback items come in that raise the same concerns over and over again, making it cluttered and difficult to organize and prioritize
I conducted 5 interviews with power users of the platform to uncover their workflows and challenges. What I found:
Important Considerations
Power users are not tech savvy
Keep the core problem front and center
Work within the design system
I kept the platform structure consistent to avoid forcing users to relearn it, focusing instead on simplifying and clarifying interactions
Every design decision should directly solve the core user problem, keeping solutions clear and effective
The existing design system was outdated and had missing components, so I focused on improving navigation and visual clarity within the given framework while requesting additional components where they were necessary
Initial Design
First Phase: Clean up the UI
Old Design: Indirect and Confusing Navigation
New Design: Reconfigured navigation to align with stakeholders’ workflow, prioritizing status filtering
Old Design: Scattered filters
New Design: Centralized filters in the left panel, keeping only "status" open to reduce information density
Old Design: There is a lack of hierarchy on the page
New Design: Increasing font size and improving contrast from top to bottom to improve readability
Old Design: No feedback differentiation or update history, forcing users to rely on memory
New Design: Indicates which feedback items were read while emphasizing newly edited or added items for clarity
p1. Added a pre-filter page for users to select a specific product or program before entering the management screen
Second Phase: Streamlined Filtering
p2. Feedback groups to better organize similar or duplicate feedback items (completely changed after usability test)
Users wanted a way to edit or change the status of multiple feedback items at once
Third Phase: Multi-edit Feedback Items
First Usability Test
Filtering by product/program was unclear
Grouping feedback felt disconnected
Status filtering was redundant
Improve card view
Users didn’t realize they needed to select product cards, indicating a need for checkboxes or clearer selection cues
Some users only had a single product/program so filtering page will now only appear for users with multiple products or programs
Users struggled with the new grouping process for similar or duplicate feedback items, finding it unintuitive and separate from their main workflow
Users found having two status filters unnecessary, making the left panel redundant. Their feedback led to removing it for a clearer UI
Users liked card view as much as list view and wanted the improved organization applied to both
This study evaluated how users interacted with the old vs. new feedback organization and management system to identify key usability issues:
Final Design
[UPDATED] Allow users to create feedback groups by right clicking. This will give the user more context and control
First Phase: Reimagine Feedback Groups
Naming the group for better organization and add similar/duplicate items directly
Naming the group for better organization and add similar/duplicate items directly
Indication of which feedback items are in feedback groups
Hovering over the group icon reveals its group name and highlights related feedback items in the left panel
Group feedback selection and management section replaces the redundant status filter
Simple dropdown for users to change between open, move to triage, and close feedback item
Second Phase: Improve communication between Product Owners and Feedback Providers
Improving communication by specifying reason for closure and allowing bulk deletion of grouped feedback items
Implemented all the new features to card view
Third Phase: Improve Card View
To implement prioritization and better organization for card view, I was inspired by Trello’s layout
Created a simple Trello-like layout to test
Trello-style approach valued, but usage uncertain
Feedback grouping (for similar or duplicate items) now felt intuitive
Users appreciate the Trello-style approach and recognize its potential value but are unsure how often they would use it, as they already have existing priority management systems (may not be worth the development efforts)
Users definitely preferred the new way of organizing similar feedback items into groups. They noted it makes the feedback items a lot more organized (reduced clutter of similar or duplicate items) and the setup process seemed intuitive
Tested the new Trello-style workflow, feedback grouping, and usability fixes from the first test to evaluate clarity, ease of use, and adoption potential. Insights collected:
In terms of prioritization and the Trello-like layout, after quick brainstorming, I figured a simple pin feature would provide the same value with significantly less development
Reflection
Key Focus Areas
What I’d Do Differently
Speed & Organization: Every minute saved and every process streamlined translates to real cost savings for the company
User Excitement: Seeing stakeholders genuinely excited about the final design was a rewarding moment
Take a more holistic approach: not just improving feedback management but also optimizing the entire experience from submission to voting
While management is the core priority, a seamless user journey on both ends would have created an even stronger impact
Even though this was an internal tool, I believed it should still be easy, intuitive, and enjoyable to use. A well-designed system isn’t just functional—it should make users feel good about using it
Second (and final) Usability Test
Connecting Musicians to Create Magic
Back to top
