Consumer · Sport, contract
Broken Trust
Stakeholders from two competing organisations wanted more features. 10,000+ app reviews said fans wanted the existing ones to work. I led discovery, made the evidence undeniable, and redirected the entire rebuild from feature count to trust.
- 10K+
- App reviews synthesised
- 40%
- Scope cut at launch, by design
- 96
- Component library variants
- Role
- Lead Product Designer
- Focus
- Discovery and rebuild
- Duration
- 2025, contract
Owned end-to-end design direction for a complete app rebuild: wireframes, interactive prototypes, a 96-variant component library, user testing strategy. Navigated a dual-organisation joint venture with competing brand interests, mentoring a junior designer through their first enterprise project.
10,000 reviews told a different story
Stakeholders wanted live scores, more stats, social sharing; the working assumption was missing functionality. No research existed to test that, so before any design work I synthesised 10,000+ app store reviews. Users weren't asking for more. They were leaving because the basics didn't work: crashes during live matches, scores that didn't update, notifications that arrived late. You don't fix broken trust by adding surface area.
Two organisations, one app, constant politics
Every design decision in the joint venture carried political weight: who gets top billing, whose visual language dominates. Rather than adjudicating each conflict, I built the machinery to resolve them: decision frameworks both sides agreed in advance, a joint editorial content strategy, and a design system on React/Tailwind foundations that neither brand dominated and both owned. The frameworks survived my departure as a contractor, which is the test that matters.
Key decisions
01
Shipped 40% fewer features at launch
I proposed cutting scope to what could work flawlessly, deprioritising social sharing, advanced stats and personalisation that competitors had. A reliable app with fewer features beats a feature-rich app that crashes during a live final. Stakeholders accepted once the review evidence made it concrete.
02
Developed the designer inside the ambiguity
I set the feedback cadence and critique practice for a junior designer and deliberately exposed them to the stakeholder complexity rather than shielding them from it. They were delivering production-ready components by project end.
03
Synthesised 10,000 reviews before designing
No research existed to test the missing-functionality assumption, so I built the evidence first. Users weren't asking for more; they were leaving because the basics didn't work during live matches.
04
Changed the question the project answered
Instead of 'what can we add', the rebuild became 'what must work flawlessly'. You don't fix broken trust by adding surface area, and the review synthesis made that undeniable to stakeholders who arrived wanting features.
05
Built machinery instead of adjudicating politics
Two competing organisations meant every decision carried political weight. Rather than refereeing each conflict, I built decision frameworks both sides agreed in advance and a joint editorial strategy. The frameworks survived my departure, which is the test that matters.
06
Gave neither brand the win
The design system, on React and Tailwind foundations, was deliberately built so neither visual language dominated and both organisations owned it. One system, two brands, no winner needed.
Outcome
The artefacts were solid; the value was the redirection. The rebuild launched focused on live scores, schedules and notifications that actually worked, on a foundation that could succeed, and the design system now underpins both brands' mobile experiences.
10K+
App reviews synthesised
40%
Scope cut at launch, by design
96
Component library variants