Executive view
The case at a glance
As UX Lead I drove a Design Ops plan: coordinating people, process, and craft to scale the value of design. I started with a disordered team—no clear roles, ceremonies, or repository—and built onboarding, skills tracking, file structure, Scrum, and a community. In a year and a half, retention rose from 25% to 70%, and new designer ramp-up went from one month to 7 days.
25% → 70%
Designers retained over a year and a half.
7 days
From 1 month to 7 days to onboard someone new.
↑95%
Design team satisfaction, according to internal surveys.
01 — Context
Starting to listen effectively to collaborators
I always believe a team shows itself in different ways depending on situations, contexts, and moments. A team is like a child that needs constant attention: if it is hungry, sleepy, or has needs, it expresses them. If it smiles, something made it happy. I use this analogy because a team displays different attitudes and performance throughout a project. When there is no clear direction in processes, methodologies, and elements that improve performance, it is likely destined to fail—just like an ice candle melting in a harsh winter. That is the context where teams fall apart: irritability, rumors, actions that stall growth. But where there are great weaknesses, there are great opportunities. In those moments I was offered the chance to build the team I wanted and envisioned. That is when I launched my initiative. Let’s begin!
The problem
Challenges identified
I organized the pain points into seven fronts: organization, collaboration, humanization, standardization, prioritization, measurement and impact, and enablement.
Inefficient structure
Design teams lacked a clear structure, which caused confusion around roles and responsibilities.
Unbalanced skills
Teams with insufficient skills for some projects and overqualified profiles for others that were simpler.
Undefined roles
Designers had no written roles, which created uncertainty and little trust in leadership.
No ceremonies
There were no weeklies, dailies, jams, or critiques: a space for follow-up and communication was missing.
Unproductive spaces
The environments were not designed for collaboration.
No community
There was no networking or practice for sharing skills.
Generic interviews
Design interviews were treated the same as those for development or QA.
On/offboarding
There was no specific onboarding or offboarding; adapting during the first three months was difficult.
Loose tools
Different design tools, with no standard, made collaboration difficult.
Misaligned activities
Without guidelines for artifacts and processes, effort was duplicated.
Scattered channels
WhatsApp, chat, email: there was no official channel.
Inaccessible data
Prototypes and artifacts lived in personal drives, not centralized.
Bottlenecks
It is hard to discover and surface bottlenecks in the design flow.
Inconsistent methods
Prioritization was done subjectively.
Unknown capacity
There was no way to measure the design team’s capacity.
Unmeasured quality
A clear Definition of Done for design was missing.
No principles
Design principles were not used as an objective measure.
Limited education
Training in best practices and trends was lacking.
Diagnosis
A demotivated team, without identity, unable to perform optimally. Action had to be immediate.
02 — Process
The journey to the solution
Once we had the pain points, we had to prioritize by criticality. One of the most important things when leading a team was having clear role scopes. After several sessions I built a complete job description: skills, competencies, and responsibilities. Company onboardings and offboardings tend to be generic. I mapped the process, wrote guides covering mission, vision, values, and also the team’s day-to-day, and designed dynamic profiles. For departures I distinguished two situations: those who left of their own accord and terminations with feedback, always with respect and careful handling of difficult conversations. For growth we built a skills matrix, reviews, and a tracking artifact for each collaborator. I closed the first version of the plan with a musical space for the team: may the music never be missing.
Tools and files
Tools, channels, and order
In the UX Lead role I needed professional tools—Figma, for example—and a single channel. With other leaders we chose Slack. I organized the files the way we do on product projects:
SP-01
Sprint draft files, where each designer generates artifacts and ideation.
Master
Validated prototypes, pasted into a central indexed file.
UI KIT
Components and usage documentation.
Miro
Boards in a single unit, accessible to the entire team.
Data repository
When I started, there was no centralized repository. I implemented one and promoted a culture of using and updating it. The team began working faster, without losing pieces across personal drives.
03 — Product
Methodology, ceremonies, and community
A team without a clear methodology does not scale. The priority was a robust process, aligned with Functional Analysis and Tech Leads, with a Lean-style linear flow. We adopted Scrum ceremonies: Daily, Weekly, Preplanning, Planning, Refinement, and Retrospective. Each one with a purpose, so topics would not get mixed. Later we added UX Jams —a designer asks for help and the team jumps in to unblock— and UX Critique —a proposal is presented to challenge it—. And the community: a space for belonging, mission, vision, and values. After a year the team was committed; the model was replicated in other teams across the company. At first, design was seen as a cost. I built usability metrics, task time, and ROI. One example: the manuals were too lengthy; a video and a visual guide reduced onboarding times. ValidUX also became more systematic. Summary: success is not instantaneous. It takes a team that pushes itself, leaders who accept the ups and downs, support from superiors, and, above all, time.
04 — Outcomes
Outcomes
Some numbers from the initiative, as they appeared in the original backup.
25% → 70%
We increased designer retention to a year and a half of tenure versus market demand.
1 month → 7 days
We reduced the onboarding time for new designers.
↑95%
We increased design team satisfaction according to internal surveys.
↑70%
We increased the team’s efficiency and performance.
70%
We automated 70% of the repetitive tasks in the design process.
↓70%
We reduced errors in the designs.
↑70%
We increased collaboration with other departments.
25% → 80%
We reduced task execution times across projects.
↑40%
We increased client conversion and secured UX service rebuy.
Conclusion
Implementing a Design Ops plan—with trust from leadership and the responsibility of leading a design team—has been a transformative experience for the team, the organization, and for me. We structured processes, improved efficiency and consistency, and used metrics to demonstrate the value of design. Success would not have been possible without Juli, Lauti, Agos, Nuri, Vale, Amy, Flor, Noe, Cris, Ari, and my peers Jime and Cari.
Learnings
Lessons learned:
Collaboration
Ongoing collaboration between the team and other departments is essential. The exchange of ideas strengthens collective work.
Metrics
Measuring impact justifies decisions and provides data to improve. Metrics make it possible to adjust strategy with information.
Adaptability
Iterating on processes and tools is crucial to staying effective. Continuous learning sustains best practices.
Other cases

CECABA Digital Signature System
OPTI
Cannect Mobile

Cannect
RUBI – GCBA

ICBC YOY UX Design Ops

ICBC Auto Pledge Loans
