.png){kind=small}
Greenworks operates at the intersection of
high-consideration commerce, hardware complexity,
and lifecycle ownership. Customers must navigate tool compatibility, battery systems, property-specific needs, and post-purchase management, all within a fragmented ecosystem of experiences.
As the platform scaled, experience inconsistency, decision friction, and system-level gaps began to impact conversion, retention, and operational efficiency directly.
1000+
Patents Published
500+
Product Catalogue
4
Business Verticals
Key Case Studies
#3 Experience Overhaul
Designing Decisions,
Not Just Pages
Redesigned PDP, PLP and Dashboard experiences to clarify comparison and buying decisions, driving higher conversion, AOV, and lower bounce.
.png)
#4 AI: My Garage
Decision Support Through Personalization
Created a personalized, signal-driven recommendation flow that adapts to user context and behavior to improve engagement and relevance across product discovery.
.png)
My Role
Lead UX Designer owning end-to-end experience strategy across commerce, systems, and lifecycle surfaces.
I partnered closely with Product, Engineering, Data, and Marketing to:
-
Set experience direction
-
Define scalable UX foundations
-
Lead high-impact initiatives across discovery, purchase, and post-purchase journeys
The Team
Senior VP of Sales
Sr. Director of Digital Channels & E-Commerce
IT E-Commerce Manager
Digital Marketing Coordinator
Director of Category Management
Senior Content Leader
Tech Lead
Digital Marketing Manager
Senior Lead UX Designer
That's me!
Goals: Key KPI's
Conversion
Rate
discovery
purchase
post-purchase journeys
Retention &
Engagement
stronger account ownership
lifecycle experiences
Platform velocity & scalability
shared systems patterns
reusable components
Friction points
across path
unifying flows and reducing cross-platform inconsistencies
Time to decision
faster discovery,
clearer decision-making, and streamlined actions
Support dependency
improving self-service flows and ownership tools
What I Heard?
As I worked closely with different teams, similar frustrations surfaced—expressed differently,
but rooted in the same gaps.
🤔 How do we know what the user wants?
😩 We’re solving the same problems again and again.
😕 We don’t know which designs are final vs exploratory.
😤 We need to move faster, but consistency keeps breaking.
😖 There’s no shared standard or decision framework.
😵💫 We know we need to work on UX, but where do we start???
🤑 The only thing that matters is - Profits!
😐 Do we even need UX? It gives slow delivery.
😳 We have huge inventory on the website?
😓 It’s hard to tie UX work to business impact.
What I Realized
Teams wanted clarity:
The challenge wasn’t resistance to UX.
It was the absence of structure.
When should
UX be involved?
How do we make decisions consistently?
UX needed to move from
helpful but optional to
predictable and trusted.
What does “good UX” mean here?
How do we know we’re improving?
The Shift
Instead of asking,
“What should I design?”
I started asking,
“What system would make a better design inevitable?”
Building the Foundation
01 UX Culture & Education
Early on, I noticed that most UX friction wasn’t about disagreement—it was about misunderstanding.
-
Engineers weren’t sure why certain UX decisions mattered
-
Stakeholders interpreted UX feedback as subjective
-
Designers had to re-explain the rationale repeatedly
This told me the issue wasn’t skill—it was shared context.
I realized UX needed to function as a shared language, not a specialized function.
This emerged to:
-
Create common principles that teams could reference
-
Make design rationale explicit and reusable
-
Build trust by demystifying UX decisions
UX couldn’t scale without shared understanding.
02 Business Alignment
In a fast-moving environment, decisions were often made based on:
-
Past experience
-
Strong opinions
-
Time pressure
Even strong UX ideas stalled when they weren’t clearly tied to business outcomes.
I began reframing UX conversations away from features and toward: Goals, Trade-offs, Impact
Ensuring that:
-
UX decisions mapped to business priorities
-
Stakeholders saw design as a strategic lever
-
Success could be discussed in terms of leadership that cared about
UX needed to speak the language of the business to earn influence.
03 Research-Driven Decisions
I repeatedly heard variations of:
-
“How does this help the business?”
-
“Is this worth prioritizing right now?”
This created inconsistency and repeated debates.
Instead of positioning research as a “phase,”
I treated it as decision support.
This supports to:
-
Reduce opinion-led back-and-forth
-
Ground discussions in observable behavior
-
Create confidence when trade-offs were necessary
Research wasn’t about validation—it was about clarity.
04 Cross-Channel Ideation
I noticed teams were solving problems in isolation:
-
Web decisions didn’t consider app implications
-
Purchase experiences didn’t connect to ownership
-
Lifecycle touchpoints were treated as afterthoughts
This fragmented the user experience.
I began stepping back and asking:
-
“Where does this experience start?”
-
“Where does it actually end?”
This helped:
-
Break channel silos
-
Encourage end-to-end journey thinking
-
Ensure experiences felt cohesive, not stitched together
Users don’t experience products in channels — they experience journeys.
05 Roadmap & Scale
Even when alignment existed, I saw good ideas fail because:
-
Everything felt equally important
-
Teams lacked sequencing
-
UX work reacted to roadmaps instead of shaping them
I started focusing less on what we should design and more on when and why.
This helped to:
-
Size opportunities realistically
-
Balance quick wins with foundational work
-
Ensure UX decisions aged well as the platform grew
Good UX at scale is as much about timing as it is about quality.
Strategic Pillars
Business
Alignment
Goals → Experience strategy
Stakeholder vision
KPI focus
UX Culture & Education
Shared principles
Design rationale
Cross-functional trust
Research driven Decisions
Audits
Behavioral insights User feedback loops
Roadmap & Scale
Opportunity sizing Sequencing
Platform scalability
Cross-channel
Ideation
Web + App + Lifecycle
End-to-end journeys
So teams had a common language and reference
point.
So design decisions were grounded in impact, not preference.
To reduce
assumption-led execution.
So collaboration felt
stable instead of disruptive.
Making Structure Real: The UX Operating Rhythm
Weekly
SUNDAY
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
Focused design reviews using shared criteria
Design Documentation for exploratory vs final
Daily Huddle with Developers
Monthly
SUNDAY
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
Week1
Experience Quality Review
Reviewed shipped and
in-progress work to assess clarity, consistency, and adherence to shared UX principles.
Pattern & System Review
Identified repeated solutions and one-off implementations to inform design system updates and reduce future rework.
Cross-Functional Alignment Check-ins
Aligned Design, Product, and Engineering on priorities, trade-offs, and upcoming decisions.
Research & Insight Synthesis
Shared key behavioral insights, audit findings, and feedback to inform upcoming sprints and roadmap decisions.
Week2
Week3
Business Impact Review
Connected UX work to business goals, surfacing where experience decisions influenced conversion, retention, or efficiency.
Process & Collaboration Health
Evaluated how well UX was integrated into sprint workflows and identified improvements for the next cycle.
Week4
Where I Faced the Most Friction
01
Balancing short-term delivery pressure with long-term system thinking
02
Gaining alignment without formal authority
03
Proving value before metrics were mature
04
Introducing structure without slowing teams down
I addressed these by:
Anchoring conversations around outcomes, not artifacts
Instead of reviewing screens in isolation, I framed discussions around what problem we were solving and how success would be measured.
For example, PLP and PDP reviews focused on reducing decision friction and improving product clarity, rather than visual polish or layout preferences.
Embedding system work inside active projects
Rather than treating the design system as a parallel initiative, I built and validated components while working on high-impact flows like PLP, PDP,
and Account.
This allowed the system to evolve from real usage and ensured immediate adoption without slowing delivery.
Prioritizing adoption over perfection
I intentionally shipped a smaller, opinionated set of components that teams could trust and reuse, instead of waiting to build a “complete” system.
Feedback from designers and engineers guided incremental improvements, making the system feel practical rather than aspirational.
Measuring progress through behavioral signals, not vanity metrics
In the absence of mature UX metrics, I tracked indicators like reduced clarification cycles, increased component reuse, earlier UX involvement in planning, and fewer repeated debates—signals that UX was becoming more predictable and trusted.
Measuring Progress
Fewer repeated UX debates
“We’ve already aligned on this pattern — let’s use the system instead of reopening the discussion.”
Increased reuse of patterns and decisions
“We used the same component from PLP in Account — it worked without changes.”
Teams proactively asking how to apply UX
“Which UX principle should guide this decision?”
“Is there a recommended pattern we should start from?”
Faster design and engineering alignment
“This makes sense — we can build it as-is without needing another round of clarification.”
Clearer linkage between UX work and business priorities
“This makes sense — we can build it as-is without needing another round of clarification.”