Decision Log

Decision

Position the portfolio around Product Design with strong Business Analysis capability.

Context

My work had evolved beyond interface design. A large part of my contribution comes from understanding complex problems, connecting user needs with business goals and technical realities, and helping teams create clarity.

Why

Separating Product Design and Business Analysis made the experience feel fragmented. The portfolio needed to show how the two capabilities strengthen each other.

Trade-off

A more nuanced positioning takes slightly longer to communicate than a simple job title.

Outcome

The portfolio now presents a clearer picture of the kind of Product Designer I am and the value I bring to cross-functional teams.

Decision

Use a focused top-level structure: Home, Selected Projects, How I Work, About and Contact.

Context

Different visitors need different kinds of information, but putting everything on one page would make the experience harder to scan.

Why

Each destination answers a distinct question: What do you do? What have you worked on? How do you work? Who are you? How can I contact you?

Trade-off

More specialised destinations introduce additional navigation choices.

Outcome

The homepage can stay focused while visitors choose the level and type of detail they want to explore.

Decision

Create a dedicated How I Work page.

Context

Collaboration, product thinking and creating clarity are central to my positioning, but they could easily become buried inside About or individual case studies.

Why

I wanted these behaviours to be visible before someone committed to reading a long project story.

Trade-off

This adds another top-level page.

Outcome

My approach to understanding problems, collaborating and making decisions becomes a visible part of the portfolio experience.

Decision

Move away from a generic research, wireframes and final UI structure.

Context

A sequence of deliverables can show process without revealing much about judgement.

Why

I wanted the case studies to explain the problem, what I learned, the decisions I made, the trade-offs involved and what those choices produced.

Trade-off

This approach requires more deliberate writing and fewer decorative process artefacts.

Outcome

Case studies are structured to communicate product thinking rather than simply document design activities.

Decision

Create layers of information rather than expecting every visitor to follow the same journey.

Context

Recruiters may need to assess relevance quickly, while hiring managers or design leaders may want much more depth.

Why

The portfolio needed to support both behaviours without overwhelming the first experience.

Trade-off

Content has to be carefully prioritised across different pages and levels of detail.

Outcome

Visitors can understand the essentials quickly and choose whether to explore projects, process, background or detailed related pages.

Decision

Use reusable components and structured project data rather than hard-coding pages independently.

Context

The portfolio will continue to evolve as projects are added, removed, reordered or expanded.

Why

A system-based implementation makes consistency and maintenance easier.

Trade-off

It requires more upfront thinking about reusable patterns and content models.

Outcome

Projects, sections, featured content and related pages can evolve without rebuilding the underlying experience.

Decision

Allow case studies to have optional related pages such as Decision Log, Design System and AI-Assisted Development.

Context

Some project stories need deeper supporting material, but placing everything on the main case-study page would make the narrative too long.

Why

Progressive disclosure lets the main story stay focused while still giving interested readers access to deeper detail.

Trade-off

Related pages introduce another layer of navigation and require careful information architecture.

Outcome

The main case study remains complete on its own while deeper topics can be explored separately.

Decision

Adapt complex desktop patterns for smaller screens rather than simply shrinking them.

Context

The desktop experience uses layouts such as sticky case-study navigation and multi-column sections that do not translate directly to mobile.

Why

Responsive behaviour should preserve clarity and usability rather than reproduce the desktop composition at a smaller scale.

Trade-off

Some components require different interaction patterns across breakpoints.

Outcome

Content remains readable and navigable across contexts without horizontal overflow or cramped layouts.

Decision

Use an editorial visual system with Source Serif 4, IBM Plex Sans, warm cream, deep green and terracotta.

Context

I wanted the portfolio to feel professional and distinctive without looking like a generic tech-product website.

Why

The editorial direction supports longer-form case-study content and gives the portfolio a more human tone.

Trade-off

A restrained visual system relies heavily on typography, spacing and hierarchy rather than decorative effects.

Outcome

The portfolio has a consistent visual identity that keeps attention on the work and narrative.

Decision

Treat accessibility as a design-system and implementation requirement from the beginning.

Context

Navigation, galleries, typography, contrast, responsive behaviour and interaction states all affect whether the portfolio is usable.

Why

Accessibility should not be a final QA task added after visual design.

Trade-off

Some visual or interaction choices require additional constraints.

Outcome

The system is designed around semantic structure, keyboard access, visible focus states, contrast, reduced-motion support and meaningful alt text.

Decision

Use AI-assisted development while keeping product and design judgement human-led.

Context

I wanted to explore a more direct path between design intent and implementation while learning more about the development side of product work.

Why

AI could accelerate implementation, but it still needed clear context, constraints and review.

Trade-off

AI-generated work can introduce assumptions, inconsistency or unnecessary complexity if the brief and guardrails are weak.

Outcome

I established an AI-assisted workflow where I define the problem, constraints and desired behaviour, then review and refine the implementation.