Operating Model
of UX Design

I inherited seven designers answering briefs. I built the function that delivered 109% of annual revenue budget across 15 products and 11 channels.

Company Midway Financeira · Grupo Riachuelo · São Paulo
My Role UX Manager, reporting to the Director of Financial Products. Team structure, governance, design system, research, and interface with Tech, Product, and C-suite.
Scope 11 designers across 15 products · 11 channels · UX Research & Strategy and Content Design created from zero
Period 2023 to 2026
Outcome 109% of annual revenue budget delivered in the core business
7→11
designers scaled
≥30%
reduction in execution time
300+
deliveries 2023 to 2026
50+
research studies conducted
Org. Transformation Design System Research & Strategy P&L Governance Fintech · Brazil · 2023 to 2026 15 Products · 11 Channels Team Scalability Org. Transformation Design System Research & Strategy P&L Governance Fintech · Brazil · 2023 to 2026 15 Products · 11 Channels Team Scalability
Midway · Modelo Operacional de UX Design
01 Organizational Context

Design capacity existed.
The organizational function did not.

I found seven designers assigned to squads, answering briefs, shipping screens. No governance. No research. No design system. Nothing connecting design decisions to business outcomes.

P
Organizational Problem

A design team with no infrastructure to scale

Seven designers with no shared standards, no research, no executive visibility. Local, inconsistent decisions disconnected from P&L. A cost center with no measurable return.

T
Strategic Thesis

UX as organizational infrastructure, not creative support

Design generates economic value when it operates as infrastructure: standardized, governed, measurable, tied to revenue and risk signals. None of it existed. I had to build from zero, and each piece was a prerequisite for the next.

A
Structural Action

Scale the team. Build the functions. Then connect to the business.

I scaled the team from 7 to 11. I created Research & Strategy and Content Design as formal functions. I implemented the design system integrated with engineering and governance via Azure, RACI, and Design Review. Only then did I connect journeys, blueprints, and research to P&L signals.

02 Structural Interventions

Four systems built
em parallel.

I didn't sequence the four fronts. Governance, team, research, and design system went up in parallel, each reinforcing the others. It was a capital allocation choice: every week without governance is a week of organizational debt compounding.

Intervention Architecture
Intervention 01 · Team Architecture

I scaled from 7 to 11 designers with seniority distributed by domain complexity, assigned to critical domains instead of generic squads. No more single point of failure where one departure collapsed a channel.

Intervention 02 · Governance Architecture

I implemented governance via Azure DevOps: roadmap with ownership and entry criteria, RACI across all critical fronts, Design Review as a mandatory gate integrated with engineering.

Intervention 03 · UX Research Function

I created UX Research & Strategy from zero and made the Double Diamond a required standard. We ran 50+ studies and 15+ blueprints integrating physical and digital journeys, NPS, logs, and research. I declined studies without strategic connection to preserve capacity.

Intervention 04 · Design System

Centralized library with documentation, DS Commit, Storybook, and direct repository connection. Its own committee and adoption metrics per squad. I treated the design system as a capital asset, not a tooling project.

03 Governance Under Mediation

The decisions that
defined the organization.

Mediation 01 · Scope Defense

I refused to turn designer into PM

  • Product tried to assign stakeholder management to designers. I formally aligned: a dual role delivers neither at full quality. I documented the roles in the RACI and enforced it in Design Review.
  • Outcome: designers protected for design. The boundary accelerated engineering's trust, which started receiving predictable handoffs.
Mediation 02 · Research Alignment

I said no to research without a decision attached

  • Requests arrived for studies with no connection to OKRs: exploratory work that would consume the researcher without informing prioritization. I created a formal filter: every request needed a strategic objective, a defined decision, and a timeline matching the roadmap.
Mediation 03 · Governance Authority

I established governance where there was none

  • Design Review, DS Commit, RACI, and entry criteria in a culture of direct designer access generated initial resistance from product and engineering. Over time the processes made room for scale. Adoption was structural, not just cultural.
  • Outcome: more predictable delivery, less rework, DS adoption tracked per squad.
04 Economic Impact

Infrastructure with
measurable return.

109%
Of annual revenue budget delivered in the core business
First time a design decision showed up as a P&L line.
≥30%
Reduction in execution time
Design system and governance compressing the cycle, without adding headcount.
−25%
Call center volume
Critical self-service journeys digitalized.
15+
Service Blueprints
Ecosystem mapped across physical and digital with NPS, logs, and research integrated.
300+
Deliveries between 2023 and 2026
Across 15 products and 11 channels, sustained by governance, not team size.
50+
Research studies conducted
Zero studies without a prioritization decision attached.
+59%
Activation conversion
Onboarding from 20 to 3 screens.
−50%
Cancellation contacts
Contacts eliminated by journey confidence, not deflection.
05 Scale and Governance

From team structure
ao operating model.

Eleven designers covered 15+ simultaneous fronts with no middle management layer: Midway App, Riachuelo App, PDV, Cockpit, WhatsApp, and Web. I kept direct interface with Tech, Product, Risk, and C-suite. Complexity was absorbed by governance, not headcount.

Governance Architecture
Planning
Roadmap in Azure DevOps Entry criteria per squad Documented RACI
Quality
Design Review ritual DS Commit flow Tech integration gate
Research & Strategy
Double Diamond standard Strategic alignment filter 50+ studies / period 15+ service blueprints
Design System
DS Committee Storybook + code library Adoption metric / squad
Channels
Midway App · Riachuelo App Payments Portal · Cockpit Store · WhatsApp · Web
06 Learnings

Learnings
from this trajectory.

LEARNING · 01

Governance is an allocation decision

Ungoverned execution becomes organizational debt: rework, misalignment, quality variance. Design Review and DS governance paid back their implementation cost in the first quarter.

LEARNING · 02

Setting boundaries builds partnership

Refusing scope and declining research are a path to shared objectives; by tying decisions to OKRs we showed that protecting capacity protects the financial health of the company.

LEARNING · 03

Design System is a strategic asset

Looking at infrastructure with adoption metrics and economic impact, the design system won executive sponsorship and engineering integration. It's capital efficiency, not a quality argument.

Next Project
Midway · Design System
and Governance at Scale
→
 Back to top