The Process
Understand the problem
To better understand the need for this requested feature, I did some research to better understand what customers were asking for and what they meant by 'branching'.
My main discoveries were:
- User's onboarding and offboarding processes were resulting in building many different workflows
- Users were building and duplicating their onboarding or offboarding workflows, then applying them into specifc organizational units based on how their company org structure is
Ideate Collaboratively and Rapidly test a solution
To get alignment on the problem, goals, and vision with stakeholders and the product manager, I led and faciliated a design sprint with a cross-functional team. I planned the activities for the sprint, mostly following Google Venture's Design Sprints structure, and recruited teammembers to participate in it. The sprint team consisted of: myself, our design team, the product manager, an engineer, and a customer-facing specialist.
Define Needs
To start defining the needs and problem statements, I had the sprint team write out ‘How Might We (HMW)’ sticky notes while listening to user interviews.
The main needs uncovered were:
- Allow users to build conditional paths for more workflow flexibility
- Ensure an easy-to-use interface, especially as workflows get more complex
- Maintain readability and visual cues to help users read and understand their workflow
Using the themes and notes from our HMW notes, I brainstormed with the team to determine who the user is, and what our goal and challenges are.
THE USER
IT Admin responsible for onboarding and offboarding of employees.
- Has some no-code experience.
- Tecnical-coding knowledge may be limited
- Wants to free up time of doing manual tasks
GOAL
Increase the number robust workflows users build, with a decrease in number of ‘small’ workflows users are building
CHALLENGES
Can customers easily manage and read a ‘robust’ workflow?
Can customers easily troubleshoot a failed ‘robust’ workflow?
Map
I then led team to create the map. The map would walk through each step the user would need to take to achieve their goal. This was the beginning of the user's journey that helped me start to visualize what actions the user would need to take and how they would get to their goal.
Sketch & Storyboard the User's Journey
I led the team through a sketching exercise to drive ideation. I, along with each participant, sketched out a solution based on our goal, challenges, map, and key findings. I identified a scenario to use for a storyboard, then led the sprint team to outline and wireframe each step in the user's journey based on our solution sketches. Each frame in the storyboard would map back to what would eventually be each screen or interaction in the prototype.
Prototyping
I developed a prototype of the storyboard we had written. To rapidly develop the designs for each storyboard frame, I split which screens and components I and the other designers would work on. I then added in interactions and flows to develop an end-to-end prototype for testing. I wrote a testing script and outlined each scenario and tasks, and worked with the User Researcher to further refine the script.
Solutions to Test
The following are solutions that came out of the sprint's ideation sessions. I wanted to get insights into how they would perform during testing.
Introducing 'Logic Blocks'
Do users understand what a 'logic block' is in the context of building their workflow and how to use it?
Coloring blocks for organization & readability
Will adding colors on each block in the workflow help users read their workflow easily and maintain organization of logic blocks?
Edit workflows steps in a single panel
Can users easily browse, add, and configure their workflow steps with this layout?
Usability Testing
Our user researcher ran 5 moderated sessions, and I sat in on each session as an active listener and took notes.

Our User Researcher developed UX Scorecards that gave a quick overview of a user test’s findings. This one was for our design sprint’s user tests.
Define Scope
Using the results of the design sprint and user testing sessions, I began the next step in the project to start defining scope with the Product Manager. We shared and reviewed the prototype and results from the design sprint with the project’s architects, who helped us understand and define what the scope for the project would be.
Design Iterations and Decisions
While we were defining scope, I was also continuing to iterate and refine the designs.
'Logic Block' becomes 'Section'
I had to ensure the new experience would migrate existing workflows into the new experience. The concept of 'logic blocks' meant that users wouldn't be able to easily add conditional logic into their existing workflows, so I had to re-think how users would also be able to easily edit their existing workflows to include conditional logic. After iterating and testing out ideas, I landed on 'sections', that would enable users to add both conditional logic and actions into their workflow
Remove Coloring of blocks
I discovered through testing that coloring the blocks confused the user more than it helped them. They were consistently misinterpreting the meaning of the colors, and it would be technically challenging to assign random colors to the blocks. Rather, I used the indentation of blocks and section headers to aid in organization and readability of the workflow.
During my design iterations, I would receive feedback and guidance from my design team, and continuously meet with the engineers and architects on this project to maintain open communication between us on any changes or updates that was happening on the designs.
As we aligned on what scope would be for this project, I also further defined and refined designs for the edge-cases and sad paths.

This taskflow outlined the different logic pieces a user could add into a section in their workflow