Case study · Workflow platform · B2B SaaS · 2025
XertiFlow — complex workflows, simple to send.
A B2B platform that helps organizations — from universities to banks — run document processes with many participants and approvals. I redesigned its structure so it could scale across industries without getting harder to use.
- Role
- UX/UI Designer
- Duration
- 2 months
- Scope
- Information architecture, UX flows, role system
- Clients
- Universities, banks and more
2 months
from discovery to final interface
Task-based
navigation, grouped by what users need to do
3 participant types
with clear roles behind each one
3 steps
to send a workflow once it's set up
01 · The problem
One product, many industries, and processes that kept getting more complex.
XertiFlow is organized around two key processes: creating a workflow and sending it. It had to work for very different organizations and support complex flows with approvals and blockers — but as it grew, the structure stopped making sense to the people using it.
- Users struggled to understand how workflows were created
- Roles and responsibilities were unclear
- Naming across the system caused confusion
- Workflow configuration was fragmented
- The system was difficult to scale to new industries
02 · Key insight
The core issue wasn't just UI complexity — it was unclear role definitions and system terminology that didn't match how organizations think about their processes.
03 · Strategy
Fix the structure, not just the surface.
Instead of focusing only on visual improvements, the goal was to simplify the structure of the system.
To keep the interface consistent and speed up development, we built it with a component-based approach on top of a UI library (shadcn/ui).
That kept the visual system consistent while the platform kept evolving.
From a system-based menu to a task-based one.
The old navigation listed everything the system had. The new one is organized around what users actually need to do: create workflows, send them, manage participants and set up their company.
04 · Key decision
Add complexity where it happens once — remove it where it happens every day.
Creating a workflow happens once; sending it happens over and over. So we moved the hard part to setup: admins define participant types and roles when they build the workflow. Sending it then becomes as simple as choosing the people for each role.
05 · Final design
A builder for complex processes, made easy to read.
06 · Outcome
A structure that can grow with every new industry.
The redesign introduced a clearer and more scalable workflow structure, improving how administrators create and manage processes — and making it possible to support new kinds of organizations without redesigning the product each time.
What I learned
- Naming is designMuch of the confusion came from words, not screens. Aligning terminology with how organizations talk did as much as any layout change.
- Put complexity where it's paid onceMoving roles to setup made the everyday task — sending — almost effortless.