The Challenge

The existing communication system had grown into a feature-heavy application where important information and actions could be difficult to find.

Moving from a physical interface to a touchscreen added another layer of complexity. The interface needed to work with gloved hands, inconsistent lighting, different hand positions, and the movement of an aircraft—all while supporting tasks where users couldn't afford to lose situational awareness.

The challenge wasn't simply redesigning the interface. It was figuring out how to make a complex system easier to understand and operate without removing the information users depended on.

My Role

I joined the project as a Junior Product Designer and grew into the Lead Product Designer over six years.

My role included:

• UX Research: Designed and conducted CUI-friendly research activities—including card sorting, preference testing, first-click testing, and contextual observations—to validate design hypotheses in realistic aircraft environments.

• Interaction Design: Simplified navigation and workflows to reduce cognitive load, minimize opportunities for error, and make critical system status information easier to understand at a glance.

• Visual & UI Design: Developed a new visual identity and reusable UI components designed for touchscreen interaction, variable lighting, gloved hands, and an unsteady environment.

• Design Collaboration: Created detailed design specifications and handoffs for software developers and partnered closely with the tech lead throughout implementation.

• Agile & Stakeholder Leadership: Integrated UX into two-week sprints, led weekly design reviews, and presented design work and research findings to customer stakeholders at the end of each sprint.

• UX Advocacy: Educated the software team and customer on user-centered design and connected UX decisions to the usability and mission outcomes of the system.

• Design Leadership: After transitioning into the Lead Product Designer role, I owned the UX direction, mentored a junior designer, and continued to contribute hands-on across research and product design.

Across each stage of my development from Junior Product Design to Product Designer to Lead Product Designer, I remained hands-on while taking on more responsibility for the product and design process.

The result was a communication management experience that shifted from a feature-heavy, complex system toward a clearer, more task-focused interface designed around the realities of its users and environment.

Research and Discovery

Research was complicated by two constraints: the product contained CUI, and the interface needed to work in an aircraft rather than a controlled office environment.

Because conventional research methods weren't always practical, I developed localized, security-conscious approaches that allowed us to gather meaningful feedback without exposing sensitive information.

I used a combination of user observation, card sorting, first-click testing, preference testing, and physical prototyping to understand:

• How users expected information to be organized

• Which actions needed to be immediately accessible

• How users interacted with a touchscreen while wearing gloves

• How environmental conditions affected readability and interaction

• Where existing workflows created unnecessary cognitive effort

Rather than treating research as a separate phase, I brought these findings directly into each design iteration.

Design Principles

The redesign needed to account for the realities of operating a complex communication system in a dynamic, high-demand environment. The research led to three principles that guided the redesign

01. Situational Awareness

Make the state of the system immediately understandable.

Prioritize the information users needed to understand system state, active communications, and potential actions without navigating through multiple screens.

02. Minimize Interaction Cost

Make critical tasks require as little effort as possible.

Streamline common workflows and remove unnecessary navigation so users could spend less time managing the interface and more time focused on the task.

03. Support Operation Under Imperfect Conditions

Design for the environment users actually operate in—not the ideal one.

Account for gloved hands, inconsistent lighting, different hand positions, and aircraft movement throughout the interaction and visual design.

Key Design Decisions

The redesign required us to make deliberate decisions about what users needed to see, how quickly they needed to interact with it, and how the interface could communicate complexity without becoming overwhelming. Three areas required particularly close collaboration between research, design, and the development team.

01. Defining Visual Priority

How much information belongs on the home screen—and what deserves the user's attention first?

The problem

The home screen needed to provide enough information for situational awareness without becoming overwhelming.

We established a strict no-scroll requirement, which meant every element needed to earn its place.

What I explored

I evaluated features based on their frequency, importance, and time sensitivity. I also used research and stakeholder feedback to understand which information users needed immediately and which could live deeper in the interface.

The decision

Rather than treating the home screen as a place to expose every feature, I organized it around what users needed to know and do first.

This created a clearer visual hierarchy between system status, active communications, and secondary functions while keeping critical information available without additional navigation.

02. Designing Fast, Intuitive Volume Controls

How can users make multiple volume adjustments quickly and confidently?

The problem

Users needed to manage several different volume levels while also keeping their attention on other communication tasks. The existing controls made these adjustments feel more complicated than they needed to be.

The challenge was to make volume changes quick and predictable without taking up unnecessary screen space or introducing accidental inputs.

What I explored

I explored different ways to group and expose the available volume controls, including how users expected the controls to be labeled, ordered, and accessed.

I used card sorting and preference testing to understand how users naturally grouped the different volume functions. Physical prototyping also helped us evaluate how the controls felt when interacting with the touchscreen in a more realistic environment.

One of the key findings was that not every control needed the same level of prominence. Frequently used adjustments needed to be immediately accessible, while less common controls could be grouped together.

The decision

I organized the volume controls around frequency of use and user expectations, giving common adjustments a more direct interaction while keeping secondary controls accessible without cluttering the interface.

We also made mute immediately accessible because of its importance during communication tasks.

The resulting interaction reduced the amount of navigation required while keeping the controls predictable and easy to find.

03. Creating a Visual Language for Complexity

How can a dense system feel simple without hiding important information?

The problem

The system needed to communicate a large amount of information, but adding more visual elements wasn't necessarily going to make that information easier to understand.

The challenge was finding the right balance between simplicity and information density. We needed to reduce visual complexity without hiding information that users relied on to understand the system.

What I explored

I looked at existing interface patterns and user mental models to identify where familiarity could make the system easier to understand.

We explored different combinations of icons, text, color, status indicators, and confirmation patterns. I also considered how each interaction should behave based on its importance and potential consequences.

Not every action needed the same amount of friction. Common, low-risk interactions needed to be quick, while higher-consequence actions benefited from an additional confirmation step.

The decision

I developed a visual language that prioritized clarity and consistency over decoration.

Rather than relying on icons or abbreviated messages simply to make the interface look cleaner, I used each visual element according to what communicated the information most clearly. Typography, color, spacing, status indicators, and interaction patterns worked together to establish a consistent hierarchy.

The result was a deliberately minimal interface that didn't try to hide the system's complexity. Instead, it organized that complexity so users could understand what mattered, what required action, and what could wait.

Validation and Iteration

Research was built into the team's two-week Agile sprint cycle rather than saved for the end of development.

I worked closely with engineering and the technical lead to turn research findings into design changes, then presented the work and key decisions to customer stakeholders during weekly reviews and sprint presentations.

This created a continuous loop between research, design, development, and stakeholder feedback.

When testing revealed problems with navigation, information hierarchy, control placement, or interaction patterns, we could address them in the next iteration rather than waiting until implementation was complete.

Outcome

The redesign moved the product from a feature-heavy communication system toward a more focused touchscreen experience built around the realities of the aircraft environment.

The work resulted in:

‍ ‍A clearer information hierarchy designed around situational awareness

‍ ‍Streamlined workflows for frequently performed communication tasks

‍ ‍Touch interactions designed for gloved hands and movement

‍ ‍Deliberate friction around higher-consequence actions‍

‍A reusable visual and interaction system for the touchscreen product‍

‍A research approach that allowed meaningful user validation within CUI constraints‍ ‍

For me, the biggest outcome was also professional: over six years, I went from contributing as a junior designer to leading the UX direction, mentoring another designer, and becoming a design partner to engineering and customer stakeholders.

Reflection

This project changed how I think about designing for constraints.

Working in an aircraft environment meant I couldn't assume ideal lighting, physical stability, or interaction conditions. CUI restrictions also meant I couldn't always rely on conventional research methods.

Instead, I had to be more deliberate about how I designed both the product and the process used to design it.

Over six years, I also grew from a junior designer into the lead responsible for the UX direction. That meant learning to balance hands-on design work with research, stakeholder communication, engineering collaboration, and mentoring.

The biggest lesson I took from the project is that constraints don't necessarily limit creativity. They often force you to understand the problem more deeply and make better decisions about what really matters.