B2B SaaS 路 Enterprise commission management 路 Financial workflow.
Back to work
Safety before publish
Commission Management Platform
A commission setup workflow for finance admins who needed to configure payout rules, verify the math, and publish without guessing what would happen next.
67%faster configuration time28%reduction in configuration errors$2M+annual client savings
Case snapshot
What I owned, shaped, and proved.
Associate Product Designer owning research synthesis, flows, interaction design, prototyping, testing, and handoff.
Finance admins, sales operations leaders, and compliance stakeholders managing payout logic.
15 interviews, 12 usability tests, 1,200+ support tickets, and a review of comparable compensation tools.
Product, engineering, finance ops SMEs, support, compliance, and client stakeholders.
Reduce setup time, prevent errors before publish, make tier logic visible, improve audit confidence, and meet WCAG 2.2 AA for finance teams.
Design judgment
I did not simplify this by hiding the hard parts. Finance admins needed a way to inspect the logic, see the consequences, and catch mistakes before they reached payroll.
1,200+ tickets and 12 client tests showed users were carrying anxiety all the way to payroll.
The old flow asked users to trust hidden logic in a workflow where hidden logic is dangerous.
Preview and validation had to move from the end of the workflow into the work itself.
Round 2 testing reached 100% task completion after Step 3 and preview visibility were redesigned.
Process evidence
The thinking I had to make visible.
Reconstructed artifacts that show what I was trying to understand, where trust felt fragile, and how the direction became safer to build.workflow architecture
5-step setup architecture
I used this architecture to separate the decisions users had to make from the reassurance they needed before moving forward.
01 Plan detailsName plan, owner, quota source
Wrong ownership or stale plan context
Owner + effective dates visible before setup continues02 Tier structureBuild thresholds and attainment ranges
Gaps or overlaps hidden in spreadsheet logic
Range coverage shown as a visible tier model03 Calculation rulesDefine rate, multiplier, caps, exceptions
Admins cannot predict payout behavior
Field examples and payout scenarios sit beside the rule04 ValidationResolve warnings before review
Unsafe logic reaches approval
Blocking errors, warnings, and explainers are grouped by consequence05 ReviewSubmit for approval with audit trail
Finance cannot defend what changed
Owner, timeline, change log, and approval state travel togetherFinance admin action
Name plan and ownersBuild tier thresholdsDefine payout logicCheck warningsReview and submit
System responsibility
Set guardrailsDetect gapsCalculate scenariosExplain conflictsRecord approval trail
Trust moment
Who owns it?Do ranges cover reality?Will payout behave?Is anything unsafe?Can I publish?
Why it matteredThe 5-step model tested better than 3-step and 7-step versions because it balanced progress with manageable chunks.
logic map
Validation logic map
This map reframed validation as emotional infrastructure: the place where the system earns permission to be trusted.
Missing range
Attainment coverage has a gap
Show exact missing interval before publishOverlap
Two tiers pay for the same attainment
Highlight conflicting cards and suggested boundaryOutlier payout
Scenario exceeds expected payout band
Ask admin to confirm cap, multiplier, or exceptionApproval risk
Plan has high-impact edits
Route to approver with change summary and audit contextGaps
Missing attainment ranges surfaced before publish.
Overlaps
Conflicting payout thresholds appeared as users built tiers.
Preview
Low, mid, and high attainment examples showed expected payout behavior.
Approval
Owner, timeline, and change history supported audit readiness.
Why it matteredSupport tickets decreased from 680 per quarter to 355 per quarter in the pilot.
decision matrix
Single page vs wizard vs guided flow
This comparison helped me choose the direction that reduced anxiety without turning the workflow into ceremony.
DirectionCognitive loadError preventionSpeedAudit clarity
Single-page smart formCognitive loadLowError preventionMediumSpeedHighAudit clarityLow
Fast for experts, but it kept too much hidden at once.
7-step wizardCognitive loadHighError preventionHighSpeedLowAudit clarityMedium
Clear, but too much ceremony for repeat plan creation.
Guided 5-step flowCognitive loadHighError preventionHighSpeedMediumAudit clarityHigh
Best balance of chunking, validation, preview, and approval context.
Why it matteredConfiguration time decreased from 45 minutes to 15 minutes after the guided model shipped.
usability synthesis
Step 3 and preview visibility
This synthesis board captured the moment the interface had the right ingredients but hid the reassurance users needed most.
Round 13 / 12 noticed preview
The reassurance existed, but it was visually too quiet.
ChangePreview moved beside rules
Step 3 examples and payout scenarios became part of the task.
Round 211 / 12 used preview
Admins checked consequences before moving toward publish.
Outcome100% completion
Every participant finished the redesigned flow in Round 2.
Mental model
BeforeSpreadsheet-like rules hid how thresholds connected to payouts.
AfterTier cards matched how admins described commission logic out loud.
Reassurance
BeforeUsers waited until publish or payroll to know whether the plan worked.
AfterPreview calculations showed expected payouts before launch.
Interaction safety
BeforeDrag-and-drop tier ordering created accidental mistakes.
AfterArrow controls and visible state changes made reordering deliberate.
Why it matteredFirst-time success increased from 60% to 87%. TODO: replace with defensible metric and method.
iteration board
Tier-card evolution
This board shows the design moving from a brittle spreadsheet pattern toward a safer visual model users could inspect before payroll.
BeforeSpreadsheet rows
Fast to scan, but ranges, caps, and payout consequences were easy to misread.
IterationDrag reorder cards
More visual, but drag-and-drop introduced accidental mistakes in testing.
FinalTier cards + preview
Arrow controls, visible range boundaries, and scenario preview made changes deliberate.
Why it matteredReplacing drag-and-drop with deliberate controls eliminated accidental deletion issues in the second test round.
Final design
Final Product Screens
Project artifact supplied by Savita for this case-study narrative.
Impact and results
What the work delivered.
Configuration time decreased by 67%Error rate decreased by 28%Support tickets decreased by 48%First-time success increased from 60% to 87%TODO: replace with defensible metric and method
Source: 15 interviews, usability testing with 12 client admins, 1,200+ support tickets analyzed over 6 months, and 90-day adoption tracking. My contribution to the $2M+ savings claim was redesigning the setup, validation, preview, and handoff workflows that reduced errors and support load; savings were attributed to the broader product and client program.