Designed the mobile experience for a commodities trading platform covering LME and FX metals. Mid-project, the scope shifted from a standalone app to full integration into the company's flagship trading platform - requiring a complete rearchitecture of information hierarchy, navigation, and component strategy.
A finance & trading company needed a mobile application for commodities traders working with LME (London Metal Exchange) and FX metals. Traders wanted quick, on-the-go access to monitor positions in their portfolio. A web version existed but ran as an independent platform with its own design language.
I joined as Senior UX Designer, working closely with a UI Designer, a UX Researcher, POs, PMs, and domain-expert stakeholders who taught me the specifics of metal trading - from aluminium to copper, lots vs. tonnes conversions, and trade type variations.
Initially scoped as a standalone app, a strategic decision was made mid-project to integrate it into the company's flagship trading platform. This meant adapting to an entirely different design system, navigation model, and information architecture. What had been independent tabs (Trade Blotter, Position Monitor, Order Monitor, Position Totals) now needed to fit within an existing structure built around a different hierarchy.
I had to reverse the navigation logic: in other platform areas, trades were accessed through positions, but in the original design the Trade Blotter was a standalone view. I rebuilt the information architecture, repacked data structures, and worked with a Business Analyst to ensure nothing was lost or orphaned in the transition.
User research revealed traders struggled to quickly identify positions. We ran prioritization studies and restructured card headers based on what users scanned first - cutting identification time significantly. This was the most impactful research finding of the project.
Rather than copying the web 1:1 or redesigning from scratch, I chose a balanced approach: preserve the logic traders already knew, but adapt structure and interactions for mobile. Familiarity met usability.
Different teams used different terms for the same concepts. I mapped all naming inconsistencies across projects, facilitated alignment conversations, and established a unified nomenclature adopted across all product teams.
Collaborated with the PO to cut non-essential features from MVP based on user interview insights. We started with Trade Blotter as the foundation - manageable enough for quick dev handoff, complex enough to establish design patterns for everything that followed.
The UX Researcher conducted 7 initial interviews to understand how traders used the web platform, their pain points, and priorities. This was followed by usability testing rounds with at least 3 users per area, using scenarios I wrote. The app is data-heavy, so our primary goal was ensuring information remained readable and useful at a glance.
The biggest breakthrough came from card sorting and prioritization exercises. Users told us exactly which data points they needed to see first to identify a position. We restructured the information hierarchy accordingly - and subsequent testing confirmed the change worked. Users had no issues navigating or finding information after the redesign.
From the start, I worked within the company's UX design system - which had gaps. I created new components as needed, always in coordination with the design system team and always WCAG-compliant (I was also serving as Accessibility Lead). We targeted WCAG 2.2 Level AA. When the integration decision came, we re-evaluated component fit, but by then the data architecture had shifted and adaptation was smoother.
I prepared accessibility annotations in UX specifications, highlighting areas requiring special attention from UI and dev teams. For developers, I created screen-specific checklists covering criteria like Non-text Content, Reflow, Keyboard access, and Bypass Blocks.
At one point, the dev team moved ahead with UX wireframes before the UI phase was complete, as they'd finished their sprint early. When I noticed the gap, I raised it with the team to realign the process. The team acknowledged the issue but planned to fix UI details 'later' - which never happened, as they'd already scheduled work on the next area. Planned user tests had to be postponed.
In another instance, some interactions were implemented differently from the approved designs due to development shortcuts. I worked with the team to bring them back in line with the agreed specs, and reinforced the importance of following the agreed process. After these incidents, I doubled down on keeping everyone informed, and the issues didn't recur.
Naming standardization was the most complex cross-team challenge. The platform had multiple product areas, each with different POs, stakeholders, user groups, and business requirements - all using slightly different terminology. Resolving this required mapping inconsistencies across all projects, facilitating conversations at multiple levels, and driving consensus on a shared nomenclature.
The integration pivot was the hardest structural challenge. I had to trace existing screens across other platform areas, build a new information architecture, restructure navigation, and repack data - all without losing completeness or clarity. Working with the BA was critical to ensure every data point had a home in the new structure.
Domain complexity added another layer: commercial metal trading has its own rules, conversion systems (lots vs. tonnes), specific trade types, and regulatory context. Building genuine understanding of this domain was essential to making sound design decisions.