Back to Portfolio
ERP Cloud Migration UX Research Shipped · 2023

Oracle ERP → Cloud Migration:
Complete UX Overhaul

A 14-month project leading the end-to-end UX redesign of a 12-module Oracle ERP system as it migrated to a cloud-native SaaS platform — impacting 150,000+ enterprise users across manufacturing, distribution, and finance sectors.

My Role
Lead UX Designer
Duration
14 Months
Team
2 UX, 1 Research, 8 Eng
Platform
Web (Desktop + Mobile)
Tools
Figma · React · Kendo UI
60%
Training Time Reduced
43%
Task Completion ↑
150K+
Enterprise Users
70%
Support Tickets ↓

The Challenge

A large enterprise manufacturing company was migrating from a 15-year-old Oracle ERP system to a modern cloud-native SaaS platform. With 150,000+ active users across 40+ countries, the stakes were enormous: any UX misstep would cascade into millions in lost productivity, employee frustration, and massive support costs.

I was brought in as Lead UX Designer to own the complete user experience layer — from initial discovery research through to shipped design system and final UI. The scope covered 12 primary modules: Inventory, Procurement, Finance, HR, Manufacturing, Distribution, Reporting, Admin, and 4 industry-specific extensions.

"The old system took 3 weeks to train a new user. We need the new one to feel self-explanatory on day one — and we need it accessible from any device, anywhere."
— VP of Operations, Client Stakeholder

What We Were Solving

The legacy Oracle system had accumulated 15 years of inconsistencies, workarounds, and technical debt — all of it baked into the user interface. A baseline audit surfaced critical issues that were costing the business real money every day.

✗ Before — Pain Points
No consistent navigation — each module used a completely different UI pattern
Desktop-only — zero mobile support for 40% of the workforce who work in the field
3-week onboarding for new users — screen-specific training required for every module
Data grids with 200+ columns and no intelligent filtering or sorting defaults
No accessibility support — failed WCAG 2.0 Level A requirements
12,000 support tickets per quarter attributed to UX confusion and workflow errors
Task completion rate of 51% for key inventory workflows
✓ After — Solutions
Unified navigation shell with consistent patterns across all 12 modules
Fully responsive — mobile-first design optimised for field teams and managers
Self-guided onboarding with contextual tooltips — new user productive in 3 days
Intelligent grid with smart defaults, progressive disclosure, and saved views
WCAG 2.1 AA compliant — accessible to all 150,000 users
3,600 support tickets per quarter — a 70% reduction
Task completion rate of 94% — a 43 percentage point improvement

Understanding 150,000 Users

Before touching a wireframe, I spent 6 weeks deep in discovery. The research scope was ambitious: we needed to understand not just current pain points, but the mental models, daily workflows, and success definitions of wildly different user groups — from warehouse floor workers to senior accountants to C-suite executives.

🔬
Research synthesis board — Journey maps, affinity diagrams, and persona matrices from 40+ user interviews
Fig. 1 — Research synthesis board from Miro, synthesizing 40+ interviews into 6 primary persona types and 12 critical journey maps
👥
40+ User Interviews
Moderated interviews across 6 user roles: warehouse workers, procurement officers, finance analysts, operations managers, IT admins, and C-suite stakeholders.
🗺️
12 Journey Maps
End-to-end workflow maps for each major module, identifying handoff points, friction moments, error recovery patterns, and workaround behaviours.
🎭
6 User Personas
Research-validated persona framework covering full skill range — from technology-cautious warehouse staff to power-user finance analysts running complex multi-year reports.
📊
Quantitative Analysis
Analysed 12,000 quarterly support tickets by category, heatmap data across 200+ screens, and task completion analytics from existing system logs to prioritize highest-impact fixes.

Key Research Findings

Three critical insights shaped the entire design strategy:

Finding 1 — The "7 window problem": Warehouse supervisors routinely had 7+ browser tabs open simultaneously to complete a single purchase order — because information was siloed across disconnected modules. This drove our "unified workspace" design principle.

Finding 2 — Mobile is not optional: 42% of our users worked primarily on mobile or tablet in the field, yet the existing system was completely unusable on anything smaller than a 1440px desktop. Mobile-first became a hard design requirement, not a nice-to-have.

Finding 3 — Training doesn't scale: The 3-week training programme existed because the UI was so unintuitive — not because the work itself was complex. Fixing the UX could eliminate 80% of the training requirement.

How We Designed It

The project followed a modified double-diamond process adapted for enterprise ERP complexity, with tight iteration loops and continuous stakeholder validation built into every sprint.

01
🔍
Discovery
User interviews, stakeholder mapping, analytics audit, competitive analysis
02
🗺️
Define
Journey maps, personas, problem statements, design principles, success metrics
03
✏️
Ideate
Sketching, design studio workshops, information architecture, user flow design
04
🔧
Prototype
Lo-fi wireframes, hi-fi prototypes, interactive Figma flows, developer prototypes
05
🧪
Test
Moderated usability testing, remote unmoderated sessions, A/B testing, WCAG audit
06
🚀
Ship
Dev handoff, QA review, launch monitoring, post-launch optimisation

Crucially, testing wasn't a final gate — it was woven throughout. We ran usability sessions after every major milestone, including paper prototype tests early on that let us validate information architecture before a single pixel was designed in Figma.

From Chaos to Structure

The information architecture phase was the most complex of the entire project. We had to rationalize 12 separate module structures into a single coherent navigation system — while respecting the existing mental models 150,000 users had built over 15 years.

Fig. 2 — Mid-fidelity wireframe of the unified dashboard shell. The left navigation consolidates all 12 module entry points with role-based visibility rules.

We ran card sorting sessions with 24 participants across 4 user roles to validate our proposed navigation taxonomy before committing to the information architecture. The results challenged several assumptions from stakeholders — particularly around how finance users conceptually group "reporting" features vs. how engineering assumed they would.

The final IA solution used a dual-level navigation model: a persistent global shell for cross-module navigation, and contextual secondary navigation that adapted based on which module the user was in — giving power users fast access to deep features without overwhelming new users.

The Visual Language

With the structure validated, I moved into high-fidelity UI design. The visual language needed to feel professional, trustworthy, and calm — enterprise users spend 8+ hours daily inside this system, so excessive visual noise or aggressive colour use would cause fatigue and errors.

Inventory Overview
2,480
IN STOCK
142
LOW
Purchase Orders
PO-2024-0441 Approved
PO-2024-0442 Pending
Fig. 3 — High-fidelity UI samples from the Inventory and Procurement modules. Dark mode with neutral greys and selective use of semantic colour for status communication.

Key design decisions that defined the visual system:

Colour as signal, not decoration: Colour is reserved exclusively for status communication (green = good, amber = attention, red = critical) and primary actions. Background and surface colours are deliberately neutral, keeping users focused on data.

Typography hierarchy that communicates density: Large module headings create clear orientation, while data values use monospaced numbers for alignment and scannability — critical when reviewing lists of inventory quantities or financial amounts.

Building for 8 Product Teams

The single most impactful deliverable of this engagement wasn't a specific UI screen — it was the enterprise design system built to support it. With 8 product teams working across 12 modules, consistency without a shared component library would have been impossible.

🧩
400+ Components
Built in Figma with auto-layout variants and in React with Storybook documentation. Every component has usage guidelines, accessibility notes, and code snippets.
🎨
Design Tokens
130+ semantic design tokens for colour, typography, spacing, and radius — synced between Figma and the codebase via Token Studio, eliminating design-dev drift.
📖
Living Documentation
Full Storybook documentation with interactive component playground, prop controls, and accessibility audit scores visible to every engineer on the team.
⚙️
Governance Framework
Design system governance process with contribution guidelines, review checklist, and bi-weekly design system guild meetings across all 8 product teams.

Measurable Business Impact

The project shipped in phases over 14 months, with each module launched to a controlled user group before full rollout. Post-launch metrics were tracked across a 6-month period.

94%
Task Completion Rate (was 51%)
3 days
New User Onboarding (was 3 weeks)
4.4 / 5
User Satisfaction Score

Beyond the quantitative metrics, the qualitative impact was equally significant. Post-launch user interviews revealed a fundamental shift in how users felt about the system — from "a tool I'm forced to use" to "something that actually helps me do my job better."

The design system became a foundational platform investment — within 6 months of launch, 3 additional product teams outside the original scope had adopted it for their own module work, extending the ROI well beyond the initial engagement.

What I'd Do Differently

Every large project leaves lessons. The three most significant ones from this engagement:

Start the design system earlier. We began building the system in Month 3, but should have started in Month 1. The early screens we designed before the system existed created technical debt and inconsistencies that took two sprint cycles to clean up.

More continuous testing, less big-bang testing. We ran major usability test rounds at months 4, 8, and 12. In retrospect, fortnightly lightweight testing with 3-4 users would have surfaced issues faster with less wasted design effort between rounds.

Involve engineering from day one. When engineers joined the process at wireframe stage (Month 4) rather than at pixel-ready handoff, the quality of design-to-development translation improved dramatically. Cross-functional pairing from the very start would have saved significant rework.

Next Case Study
SaaS Analytics Dashboard Redesign