SEQUENCING THE
WORK SO IT
SHIPS IN THE
RIGHT ORDER

Design strategy is deciding what to build, for whom, and in what order, then making the case for it. Four threads of that upstream work follow: phasing a platform revamp into shippable stages, mapping divergent persona needs, auditing the competitive landscape for opportunity, and shaping a connected product vision leadership can rally around.

Role
Lead Product Designer
Discipline
Roadmapping, persona strategy, competitive analysis, vision
Context
Enterprise B2B SaaS platform
Threads in this study
04
THREAD 01 / 04
Phased platform revamp
6
Phases sequenced from discovery through polish and scale
4
Major flows brought into a single coordinated rollout plan
3
Decision points to validate before committing each phase
The problem

An aging platform area needed a full revamp spanning four major flows: campaign management, campaign creation, an asset manager, and asset creation. Rebuilding all four at once was a non-starter; each stage had to ship something usable and de-risk the next.

What I did

I built a six-phase roadmap: discovery and foundation, core MVP, asset manager, creation flows, analytics, then polish and scale. Explicit scope lines, a success criterion, and named decision points in every phase meant each stage was validated before the next was committed, so the team never bet more than one phase of work on an unproven direction.

Each phase ships something usable and clears risk for the next, with the MVP validated by beta users before we move on. Roadmap principle, phased rollout
STEP SYSTEM DECISION EDGE CASE END MILESTONE 01: CORE MVP MILESTONE 02: EXPANSION HIGH-LEVEL FLOWS INTERNAL DECISION LOGIC HIGH-LEVEL FLOWS INTERNAL DECISION LOGIC OVERVIEW + TEMPLATES CREATE FLOW 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 BETA GATE ROLE-BASED ACCESS ARCHIVE 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.6
Fig. The working flow board: both milestones mapped end to end
THREAD 02 / 04
Persona story mapping
5+
Distinct personas mapped, from marketers to developers to admins
8
Roadmap influences traced directly to customer input
100%
Of stories tied to a phase and real needs
The problem

The platform served distinct personas, from hands-on marketers to designers, developers, and enterprise administrators, all wanting fundamentally different things. A one-size-fits-all roadmap risked building for an average user who didn't exist.

What I did

I mapped the work into user stories grouped by persona and phase, written in the standard "as a, I want to, so that" form to keep each need explicit and prioritizable. The divergence became visible: where personas overlapped, conflicted, or where a feature served one group at another's expense. Priorities were grounded in direct customer input, including a design partnership with a major media publisher that co-validated the direction, so every sequencing decision traced to a real need instead of an average user who doesn't exist.

Map the stories by persona and you see exactly where needs pull in different directions; you stop building for an average user nobody is. Persona strategy, roadmap learning
COMMITTED SHARED LATER CONFLICT VALIDATED STORY MAP STORIES BY PERSONA AND PHASE PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 MKT DSN DEV ADM OPS STORY FORMAT AS A I WANT TO SO THAT PRIORITIZE INTO PHASES
Fig. The story map: stories placed by persona and phase, conflicts marked, prioritized back into phases
THREAD 03 / 04
Competitive landscape
3
Direct competitors audited against the standards in this surface
2
Core engagement rates benchmarked above industry: click-to-install and click-to-open
100%
Of gaps converted into named roadmap opportunities
The problem

Roadmap decisions lacked a clear read on where the product stood against the market, making it hard to tell genuine opportunity from missing table stakes.

What I did

I audited the category's major players on how each handled this surface's standards, from dismissal behavior to template systems, then benchmarked our strongest internal pattern against them and against published industry rates. The findings converted into named opportunity areas that fed straight into the roadmap. With engagement campaigns already clearing industry benchmarks on click-to-install and click-to-open, the roadmap had a clear bar to protect while it closed the gaps.

The gaps between what competitors offer and what we expose today are exactly where the roadmap's opportunities live. Competitive audit, opportunity framing
COMPETITOR US OPPORTUNITY GAP MARKET MAP MAJOR PLAYERS, AUDITED ON STANDARDS STANDARDS COVERAGE ENGAGEMENT A B C D OPPORTUNITY US BENCHMARKS ENGAGEMENT VS INDUSTRY CLICK-TO-INSTALL INDUSTRY CLICK-TO-OPEN INDUSTRY GAPS FEED THE ROADMAP ROADMAP
Fig. The market map: major players audited and benchmarked, with gaps feeding the roadmap
THREAD 04 / 04
From feature list to flywheel
4
Modules framed as a single connected, end-to-end loop
1
End-to-end narrative leadership and customers could rally around
2
Audiences served by one story: internal alignment, customer GTM
The problem

Planned capabilities read as a scattered feature list, not a direction. Leadership and customers needed the story connecting them: why these pieces, why together, what they add up to.

What I did

I shaped a connected vision for a modular system: suggestion, syncing, management, and measurement as four parts of one end-to-end loop. Each module stands alone yet composes into the full visibility and control teams otherwise cobble together across separate tools. The roadmap stopped reading as a feature list and started reading as a direction.

Four modules that each earn their place alone, then chain into the end-to-end visibility and control most teams still stitch together by hand. Product vision, modular system narrative
FOUR PLANNED CAPABILITIES EACH DOES A CLEAR JOB ON ITS OWN SUGGEST RECOMMENDS WHAT TO RUN NEXT SYNC KEEPS EVERY CHANNEL CURRENT MANAGE ONE PLACE TO CONTROL IT ALL MEASURE SHOWS WHAT WORKED, AND WHY CONNECTED, THEY CYCLE RUN AS ONE CYCLE EACH ROUND OF RESULTS STARTS THE NEXT ROUND OF WORK SUGGEST SYNC MANAGE MEASURE RESULTS FEED THE NEXT SUGGESTION THE WORK VISIBILITY + CONTROL, END TO END
Fig. The flywheel: suggest, sync, manage, measure, with results feeding the next cycle
A-1 / CASE STUDY
← ALL CASE STUDIES