Productivity Apps

Do you think the UI of D365 F&O is chaotic? Guess what - an ERP is not designed to be user friendly, it's designed to be robust! The bigger the ERP, the more true you will find this to be. Why? Because: - UI improvements don't sell well unless the buyer is the end user (and it's not, it's the board, often on a purely economical basis). - Keep adding more and more features (and any application will reach that point given enough time) and you will find it impossible to have a slick UI. - Flexibility often comes at the cost of intuitive design. It's challenging to build for both great user experience AND maximum customisation in a complex business application like an ERP. Ah, but now I hear you say: “Ok, this doesn’t solve our problems though. Our users find the system chaotic and our productivity goes down.” Ok, let’s handle it then. This is how you can really improve your users' experience with D365 F&O: 1. Tailor security access: Streamline user interfaces by showing only what's necessary. Properly configured security roles can significantly declutter screens and simplify navigation. 2. Design smart customisations: Avoid designing overly convoluted features that add too many buttons and forms. Less is more, also in software design. 3. Train users: Teach users how to navigate D365 F&O and how to personalise forms to their needs. Use saved views to speed up filtering and display of relevant information. 4. Leverage PowerApps: Create user-friendly interfaces for specific tasks or roles (e.g. data input). PowerApps can provide a more intuitive front-end while still leveraging D365 F&O's robust back-end capabilities. 5. Leverage reporting: Build targeted workspaces dashboards that give users quick access to the information they need. This reduces the need for complex navigation within the system. Remember that improving user experience in D365 F&O isn't about making it look pretty. It's about making it work efficiently for your specific business needs. So empower your users to make the most of the standard D365 F&O capabilities - they’re often underestimated. Use the advice above to create a more intuitive, productive environment for your users without compromising on the system's robustness.

From the long list of "things UX can learn from game design" is a concept called Time To Hadouken, or TTH. If you believe that good UX is about giving your users superpowers, read on. For those unfamiliar - the Hadouken is an iconic ability from the Street Fighter games. Normal character attacks are things like punches and kicks but "⬇↘➡🤜" made your character yell "HADOUKEN!" and shoot a big blue energy blast. This was immediately appealing to players - it wasn't just awesome, but also accessible. You could jump into your first fight and be shooting Hadoukens left and right. These "combos" became the selling point of the game series, and many other game franchises copied them - but often got one key thing very wrong. It's the same thing that UX often gets wrong. A lot of productivity software makes the same pitch to customers: we will give you superpowers, you will be able to cool stuff that you can't do in any other app. And then they put barriers in the way of doing that thing. Their "time to Hadouken" - the time that it takes for the app to fulfill its core promise - gets padded out. Just like the games that copied Street Fighter made their combos increasingly esoteric to please hardcore fans or added unnecessary cinematics and intro stages that delayed the action, apps throw things like welcome tours in the way of the user, or present them with a blank canvas that they must populate before they can experience the app's most important features. Often this happens because there's no clear sense on the team of what their product's Hadouken actually is. It's easy to pull out a list of features, but not very helpful. Street Fighter also has a list of features - there are 121 characters, and each has many combos - but only one Hadouken. It's the most basic selling point that makes the user go "whoa, that was awesome!" in the shortest period of time. If you don't know what your Hadouken is, you desperately need to do the work to figure it out - and then build your onboarding in such a way that minimizes the time to Hadouken.

Recently, I conducted user testing for some exciting projects at Stanford, and decided to share some insights. This post feels especially personal because it’s not just about design—it’s about my journey as both a student and a designer. When I first came to Stanford as an international student, I struggled with navigating its complex academic systems. It was frustrating, and I remember wishing for tools that could make things simpler and more intuitive. Fast forward to today, and I have the incredible opportunity to work on improving those very systems—side by side with current students. Listening to their frustrations during user testing brings back so many of my own memories. It’s a full-circle moment, where my past experiences fuel my passion to make these tools better for everyone. Here are some interesting insights: • 𝗠𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: Users often approach academic tools with mental models shaped by other apps or systems they use. Identifying and aligning with these expectations can significantly reduce confusion and improve engagement. • 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿: Academic tools are often used in high-pressure moments (e.g., enrollment deadlines). Testing revealed that reducing friction in the interface during these times significantly improves the overall experience. • 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Today’s students expect tools to adapt to their preferences, like saving search filters or suggesting classes based on their academic history. • 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗩𝗶𝘀𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆: Students value clear, visual representations of information, such as progress bars for degree completion or graphs showing their weekly workload distribution. • 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗕𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆: Designing for inclusivity means accounting for diverse backgrounds, from non-traditional students to those who are the first in their family to attend college. • 𝗜𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗙𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗶𝘀 𝗚𝗼𝗹𝗱: Even after a design seems polished, user testing consistently uncovers areas for refinement, proving that the design process is never truly finished. User testing can be really challenging but truly rewarding in the end. I decided to share these moments to contribute to a community that’s all about learning and growing together. If you’ve got user testing stories or tips, I’d love to hear them—let’s inspire each other! #UXDesign #UIDesign #UserTesting #HumanCenteredDesign #DesignForEducation

I recommended an app to a friend last week. He had a very specific problem he was trying to solve. He downloaded it. And the first screen said: “Link your bank accounts.” Before he saw a dashboard. Before he saw a demo. Before he understood what the app was actually going to do for him. Just: give us your data. (And your bank accounts at that!) Some will argue it needed the data to work. Maybe. But it didn’t need the data to show value. It could have: • Walked him through a demo with dummy data • Shown a clear before-and-after • Given him a 60-second guided tour • Asked: “What problem are you trying to solve?” Imagine this instead: “What’s driving you crazy right now?” 🔲 I can’t track spending 🔲 I don’t know where my money goes 🔲 I want to save more 🔲 I’m trying to pay down debt He clicks one. Then the app says: “Great. Here’s exactly how we fix that.” And shows: • The screen he’ll use • The numbers that will populate • The outcome he’ll see • The result he can expect Then — and only then — asks him to connect his bank. This is not just a fintech problem. I see this constantly with AI productivity tools. What they say they are: • “AI-powered workflow automation” • “Agentic infrastructure” • “Reinventing knowledge work” • “Seamless optimization across teams” I have 100 problems at any given moment. I don’t even know what to prioritize half the time. So when a new AI productivity tool lands in my newsletter inbox, I’m open. But don’t make me reverse-engineer your value. What I need them to be: • Tell me right away if I fit your Ideal Customer Profile (ICP) • Fix this one specific problem that is driving me crazy • Show me exactly how it works • Use simple language • Show screenshots • Walk me through the before and after Show me that you understand one specific pain point inside my chaos and how you fix it in the plainest English, please. I even see this in CPG. Beauty, specifically. So many products are out there, but they don’t tell me how to use them. In fact, I saw a clearly labeled “Leave-In Conditioner” the other day whose directions said to rinse it out. 🤔 Serum before moisturizer? Morning or night? Product A with Product B? 1x per week or 4x per day? You built the product. You’re the expert. Tell me exactly who it's for. Tell me exactly how to use it. Tell me exactly what it will fix. And NEVER assume I know anything. If I can see myself clearly in your use case, I’ll lean in. It’s like I always say: I’m an angel investor. Speak to me like I’m 5 years old. Value first. Access second.

IT often looks at software through the lens of innovation and technology. But to employees? It’s just a utility. Just like the restrooms. Nobody goes to work to "engage" with the office plumbing. You use it because you have to, so you want it to work flawlessly, and you want to get out of there as fast as possible. Employees don't want a "relationship" with their desktops or the IT deptartment anymore than they do with the sanitation dept. They just want three simple things: 1. To be able to do their job Software is a tool, not a destination. It's simply the means to an end for users. An accountant wants to balance spreadsheets. A sales rep wants to talk to customers. Employees don't want to learn a complex new UI. Nor do they admire their desktop wallpapers. They want zero friction so they can focus on their actual work. 2. To leave on time Employees trade their time for a paycheck and value their personal lives. When an IT tool is slow, glitzy, or requires five extra clicks to complete a simple task, it is actively robbing them of their time. If a clunky expense system adds 20 frustrating minutes to a Friday afternoon, IT has failed them. 3. To get paid At its core, employment is a transaction. Employees need the core infrastructure—pay, benefits, HR requests—to work flawlessly and predictably. Over-complicating essential tools with endless "features" and "options" just introduces bugs, anxiety, and anger. What employees actually want is a high-speed utility that lets them fulfill their workplace obligations as efficiently as possible so they can log off and get back to their real lives. When IT treats software as a "destination" rather than a "simple tool," they fail to meet the three most fundamental needs of the workforce. Stop building for capability. Start building for usability. What's the most over-engineered, "glitzy" IT tool you've been forced to use that actually made your job harder? Let's hear your worst horror stories. #CorporateIT #UserExperience #EmployeeEngagement #Productivity #WorkplaceCulture

“Did the user complete the task? Yes? Great!” Task analysis is often treated like a checkmark. But this approach overlooks the complex mental, emotional, and sensory activity happening even in the most basic flows. Users are not just clicking through, they’re thinking, feeling, and reacting at every step. In a five screen flow, even one that looks simple and linear, users do a lot behind the scenes. They may make 50 to 100 small decisions, like noticing a button, figuring out where to tap, or checking if something looks right. A lot is going on in someone’s head. They’re also pulling from memory. Maybe they remember a password, what was on a previous screen, or are trying to guess what will happen next. That could happen 10 to 20 times in just a few moments. Emotions are involved too. A confusing step might create frustration. A smooth one could bring relief or satisfaction. You might see 5 to 10 emotional spikes, both positive and negative, as users experience: → perception → attention → memory → decision-making → predictions → motor control → context-switching → goal-tracking → self-monitoring Their minds are shifting constantly, like switching from browsing to making a payment, which takes energy and focus. So even if a task looks easy on the surface, there’s a lot going on underneath. That’s why task analysis alone isn’t enough. Testing concepts in high volume reveals much more. Using UX metrics to track emotional highs, effort, and behavior helps you see a fuller picture. These metrics give you stronger signals to guide better design decisions. #productdesign #productdiscovery #userresearch #uxresearch

We are completely overindexing on raw model capability while ignoring how humans actually interact with software. A lot of AI startups and enterprise teams are learning a brutal truth the hard way right now. Your foundation model quality means nothing if your user experience is broken. Here is the breakdown of how this plays out in production: 1/ Poor AI with poor user experience is a guaranteed failure. That one is obvious. But here is the trap. 2/ Good or even great AI with a poor user experience will also lead to failure. If a user has to fight a clunky interface or guess how to handle latency just to get a response, they will drop the tool and go back to their old workflow. 3/ Good or great AI with an average user experience is a total coin toss. It might get you moderate success, or it might just fizzle out as a forgotten pilot project because the daily friction is still too high. 4/ Real traction only happens when you cross into high quality UX. Good AI paired with a great user experience is successful because it easily fits into someone's active workflow. 5/ And when you take a truly great, frontier class model and wrap it in a seamless, highly intuitive user experience, that is where the product becomes magical. Stop focusing 100% of your engineering energy on chasing the smartest model in the lab. If you do not build the orchestration layers and the design infrastructure to make that intelligence easy to command, you are just building an expensive engine with no steering wheel. #EngineeringLeadership #SystemsThinking #MetaShift #UserExperience #ProductDesign #SoftwareArchitecture #EnterpriseAI

The best product feedback we get? It’s almost never about the big, shiny features. It’s about something small: A one-click action that saves five steps. A layout tweak that makes a workflow feel effortless. A button that shows up exactly where it’s needed. We hear things like: “Oh, of course that’s how it works.” That’s not just satisfying. That’s the goal. As someone who started out focusing on building products, I’ve always been more obsessed with the details that feel obvious than the ones that sound impressive in a pitch deck. Some of my favorite examples inside Copper: ✅ Inline editing of fields in a list. Our customers are so familiar with spreadsheets and making the list editable without having to leave the page is small but mighty. ✅ Letting users link pipeline records, so your Deals and Projects aren’t floating in separate silos. ✅ Features like drag-and-drop stages and inline task creation remove unnecessary clicks, save seconds on every task, and add up to real time saved across an entire team. These aren’t the features we lead with in a launch, but they’re the ones people notice after they’ve been using the product for a while. These are the ones that make them say, “I didn’t realize how much I needed that.” The truth is, the best product experiences aren’t always the loudest. They’re the quiet, thoughtful details that remove friction instead of adding flash. They’re what users remember, and what they come back for. Great design should feel inevitable. And when it does, that’s not magic: it’s the result of a team sweating the small stuff. What’s one “invisible” UX decision that’s made your life easier lately?

Whenever I start any project, it's tempting to skip UX design and dive into execution. But here's the truth: investing in UX upfront always pays off, often in surprising ways. Whether you want to admit it or not, we've all been there. You're kicking off a new project. There's excitement. There is pressure. You have a new Confluence board or Monday task list. You need to get the following done ASAP: ✅ Translate SOW to requirements ✅ Define MVP ✅ Assemble team ✅ Kick off client meetings Trust me, I'm no stranger to the pressures of showing progress early and often. In this whirlwind, it's easy to overlook the person advocating for thoughtful UX design. 🚀 Here's my Monday Power Tip about making software that will benefit everyone: Design experiences, not just interfaces. I'm not talking about how the software looks or feels - yes, those matter. Rather, think about what you want people to feel deeply, understand, think, perceive throughout the entire implementation process. Rarely do I see teams who have: - Mapped out user journeys with decision points - Developed detailed personas - Conducted thorough user research - Balanced upfront design with calculated risks It's usually because it takes time. But the payoff is immense: 👤 For Users ↪ Reduced frustration, increased productivity ↪ Improved adoption through change management 💼 For Customers: ↪ Faster time-to-value, higher retention ↪ Increased recommendations and references 👔 For Executives: ↪ Tangible ROI, clear decision-making framework ↪ Alignment with board-level goals 💻 For Developers ↪ Reduced rework, clearer priorities ↪ Improved design-dev collaboration Be intentional about these, and you'll find the following occur: Shorter dev cycles, higher adoption, lower support costs, stronger brand, and happier teams. Every project is an opportunity to differentiate and delight. So if you're kicking off a project this week, take a breath. Carve out time for intentional experience design. Your team, your future self, and your customers will thank you.

The failed GPT-5 launch reminds us why choice architecture matters in UX. OpenAI learned this the hard way when users revolted.   OpenAI replaced multiple GPT models with "unified" GPT-5, removing access to older models.   Within hours, it was called a "disaster" and "garbage" on Reddit. Backlash so severe that Sam Altman had to promise to bring back GPT-4o.   The lesson? Consolidation ≠ Simplification.   True simplification guides users to the right choice while preserving their sense of control. It's about reducing cognitive load, not eliminating pathways.   This applies far beyond AI. 👉 It's why Adobe kept Classic and Modern workspaces even after years of "modernization." 👉 Why Spotify maintains multiple playlist creation methods despite having a "smart" algorithm. 👉 Why Microsoft Office still offers ribbon and classic menu options. 👉 Why successful SaaS platforms let power users access advanced settings while guiding new users through streamlined flows.   At Germain UX, I've seen this pattern in our monitoring data. When enterprises force users from familiar workflows to "simplified" ones without choice, engagement can drop by 40-60% in the first week.   But when they offer guided transitions with fallback options? Adoption has a much higher tendency to succeed.   The irony is that OpenAI's "intelligent" model selector that "just knows when to think" failed to recognize the most basic user need: the feeling of control over their own experience.   A good question to ask next time you're tempted to 'simplify' by removing options: Am I actually simplifying the experience, or just the interface?   #UXDesign #ProductDesign #UserExperience #DigitalExperience