Finance Dashboard Redesign

CiTi bank has a 1 Trillion dollar commitment towards climate goals until 2030. As part of their auditing and evaluation of these investments 2 reviewers and 1 approver (C-Level) have to evaluate transactions that are submitted internally or by a third party every quarter. The current work is done on Excel, email and Zoom and lacks any audit trail, best practice for documentation and experience, and extremely cumbersome look back YoY. The business invested 1 million in 2023 toward a Sustainable Finance Transaction Review(SFTR), which was supposed to be delivered by June 2024. It is still in phase 1 of delivery and I was brought in to streamline the design sprinting and align the product to CiTi design best practices. 

1. Business was used to giving design instructions and the entire tech team coded the requirements instead of design sprint and discovering pain points. 

2. The tech team ran weekly design, approval, release, and testing sprints. This resulted in 13 months of delay in actual product deliverables 

3. The product had several status stages in the workflow that were not fully fleshed out and with additional phase 2 requirements the entire workflow delivered in phase 1 was also at the risk of overhauling. 

4. The technology team did not give the UXD and UXR(Me) access to the client for 3 months as they did not want to open a can of worms. 

With no access to client or user feedback I went ahead and did a heuristic evaluation of the current state of the deliverable and identified gaps and pain points using screen capture and workflow diagrams using figma. 

This exercise helped identify the breakpoints in the user flow journey and areas that needed additional design and research. This also resulted in a clear understanding of forms workflow and the scope of work for each persona. 

The three persona identified were submitters, reviewers, and approvers. Submitters were making a submission using bulk or single form submission. Reviewers were ensuring the data and fields (80 per form) were accurately filled out. This process could take several rounds of back and forth between the submitter and reviewers. Once fully audited the forms would then move on to the approvers who were reporting it to other business units on risk and investment gaps.