• Webapp
  • Refactoring
  • Discovery
  • UX Research
  • UI design

Document Tracking

Redesigning document tracking for more intuitive, efficient management

iMac mockup of the card-based document tracking interface
Role
Product Designer
Project lead, UX/UI, workshop facilitation and user testing
Tools
Figma, Maze, Jira
Derisking workshops and high-fidelity prototyping
Company
Siteflow
SaaS solution for tracking complex industrial sites
Status
In development
The discovery phase was conclusive and let us dig deeper into one direction.

01 / THE PROBLEM

Rigid document management
and buried actions

Clients don’t understand why the platform is so rigid about “version” versus “revision”. “EDF talks about versions; everyone else talks about revisions.” Today, cancelling the latest versions is poorly handled.

On top of that, the management modal is hard to reach, many actions are hidden or don’t match the user’s permissions, and adding contributors is anything but intuitive.

6 Critical pain points

Identified during our audits, heavily affecting the operational productivity of project teams on site.

02 / GOALS & KPIs

Defining our success criteria for the redesign

01

Improve Usability

Provide a simple, clear interface that reconciles the constraints of EDF and other industrial clients.

Target

SUS score > 80

02

One-click actions

Remove hidden action menus so everyday operations are instantly accessible.

Target

100% of actions visible

03

Seamless Collaboration

Make it easier to assign and invite collaborators to co-write documents.

Target

Up to 5 collaborators in one click

03 / RESEARCH & DISCOVERY

Immersion and derisking workshops with the delivery team

To understand what was blocking end users, we combined client data analysis, wording workshops and card-sorting sessions.

Delivery Workshops

Technical alignment and identifying the limits of the current product

Wording & Card Sorting

Clarifying terminology (revision vs version) and hierarchy

Workshop Card Sorting Figjam

Card-sorting workshop: cards to sort Card-sorting workshop: cards grouped by theme

3 Key Insights

Terminology confusion

EDF and non-EDF clients use different terms (version vs revision), leading to serious misinterpretations.

Hidden actions

Critical features such as duplicating, cancelling or publishing are buried in hard-to-reach sub-menus.

Mismatched permissions

The actions shown on screen don’t always match the user’s role on site, frustrating approvers.

04 / TARGET PERSONAS

Understanding our two key user profiles

Marc, 42

Field Operations Manager at Framatome

Manages hundreds of technical documents • Highly organised

“I need to make sure every version strictly follows EDF’s nuclear naming conventions, with no risk of a revision error.”

Goals

  • Secure revision traceability
  • Access the full history in one click

Pain points

  • Constant confusion between version and revision

Sophie, 35

Technical Writer at CNR

Needs speed • Works on several projects at once

“I need to send our documents to field teams quickly, without hunting for the action across three sub-menus.”

Goals

  • Publish a document in under 10s
  • Add co-writers easily

Pain points

  • Time wasted on hidden actions

05 / SECURE USER FLOW

A logical, reassuring flow from creation to approval

  1. Step 1

    Creation

    Generating a new revision

  2. Step 2

    Collaboration

    Quickly adding contributors

  3. Step 3

    Review

    Assigning role permissions

  4. Step 4

    Publishing

    Sending with a direct comment

06 / PROTOTYPING & WIREFRAMES

Finding the balance between a classic list and cards

Existing document tracking interface

Existing interface

Complex, hidden actions. A cramped modal and unclear buttons, causing frustration.

Wireframe of the list redesign

v1 – List redesign

Closer to EDF’s naming conventions. Better contrast, but the structure was still too rigid.

Wireframe of the card redesign

v2 – Card redesign

An interactive card system for adjusting permissions, contributors and history directly and visually.

Final choice

07 / A/B USER TESTING

Measuring the effectiveness of the new approach

We tested the classic list (Version A) against our card concept (Version B) on a complete editing and approval scenario.

Version A: list design

Version A — List design

The traditional approach based on the legacy interface: familiar, but not very intuitive.

Version B: card design

Version B — Card design

My new concept, grouping metadata and collaborative actions into distinct semantic blocks.

80 vs 92

Usability Score (SUS)

A clear edge for the card design

4.0 vs 4.3

Opinion Score (/5)

Testers’ overall rating

38% vs 62%

Final Choice

Overwhelming preference for the card version

08 / GUIDELINES & DESIGN SYSTEM

Siteflow Design System

The new components (cards) were built from the design system’s existing atoms, rearranged into new structures. The base elements are reused, ensuring visual consistency. The goal is to keep a modular approach: every card can be stacked and combined freely.

New Components

New components: revision card and status card

09 / RESULTS & IMPACT

An interface embraced with enthusiasm

“The card version flows better. There’s little room for error because the buttons you need appear as you go. No more searching for them.”
Test userSite Manager, Dalkia

10 / LESSONS & REFLECTIONS

What we take away from this redesign

  1. 01

    Daring to try two radically different approaches

    Rather than simply iterating on the existing list, creating a card concept unlocked new ways of collaborating.

  2. 02

    Card sorting as a compass

    Card sorting kept us from hiding essential actions again by structuring the fastest possible access from the start.

  3. 03

    Staying close to delivery

    Working closely and early with field engineers let us quickly validate the feasibility of complex revision cancellation.

11 / NEXT STEPS

Rollout roadmap

  1. 1.Incorporating user feedback to refine the final UX.
  2. 2.Prioritising features in the product backlog.
  3. 3.Weekly agile ritual with the squad.
  4. 4.Incremental development and continuous integration.