Gabriela García

All cases

08 / Service design · Industrial operations · 2023

INDUSTRIAL SERVICES

Turning a fragmented operation into a shared view of the service.

Over two and a half months, a multidisciplinary team connected internal processes, customer experience and product opportunities before defining a new tool. I focused on analysis, synthesis, journey mapping and co-facilitating some activities.

Diagnosis + prioritized opportunities

Role
Product Designer · multidisciplinary team
Contribution
Analysis · synthesis · journeys · co-facilitation
Scope
Operations + customer experience
Period
2023 · 2.5 months

The challenge

Before designing the tool, we had to understand the service

The operation connected sales and service agreements with scheduling, logistics, collection, treatment, documentation, billing and collections. Each team saw only part of the journey and used different systems, files and channels.

The challenge was not to start with an interface. It was to make the end-to-end service visible, find broken handoffs and understand which internal frictions also reached customers.

  • Partial perspectives

    No shared view of all dependencies.

  • Fragmented information

    Tracking, documentation and status spread across tools.

  • A tool still to define

    The team had to decide what the product should solve before turning needs into features.

My contribution

Structuring collective research

I worked with Research, UI, Service Design and Product Management, as well as client leaders and specialists. I contributed to interview analysis and synthesis, journey mapping, and workshop preparation and support; I co-facilitated some activities.

My focus was connecting scattered pieces: linking findings to service stages, making cross-team dependencies explicit and turning evidence into a basis the team could review and prioritize.

  • 34

    stakeholder interviews

  • 6

    weeks mapping AS IS / TO BE

  • 4

    prioritization sessions

  • 1

    in-person workshop day

  • 15

    listed customers

  • 2.5

    months of co-creation

These figures describe collective project scope, not individual authorship or post-launch impact.

Value proposition

The tool had to serve the service, not the other way around

The work connected customer experience, operations and technology dependencies to decide which problems a new tool should address. Research did not produce an isolated screen list; it created criteria to discuss traceability, documentation, self-service, logistics coordination, integrations and new service options.

These directions connected interviews, mapping, prioritization and benchmarking. They remained product opportunities and proposals—not an approved roadmap or implemented features.

  • Traceability

    Visible status, documents and validations.

  • Orchestration

    Coordination across logistics and operations.

  • Self-service

    Portal, alerts and tracking.

  • Integrations

    Data across systems and teams.

  • Documentation

    Billing, evidence and closure.

  • New services

    Opportunities from research and benchmarking.

Decisions and evidence

From scattered perspectives to a shared view of the service

Research from the inside and the outside

The final delivery documents 34 interviews with internal and indirect stakeholders, plus 15 listed customers.

Map the ecosystem before reducing it to a flow

Synthesis represented actors, teams, systems and exchanges to reveal end-to-end dependencies.

Turn the operation into a shared AS IS journey

Three weeks of mapping connected stages, teams, friction and dependencies.

Prioritize before proposing

Four sessions with leaders moved pain points into an impact/effort matrix.

Co-create the TO BE with the teams involved

A one-day in-person workshop used the journeys as a basis for discussing future scenarios.

Impact and scope

From isolated opinions to a shared decision base

The team delivered an ecosystem map, AS IS / TO BE journeys, prioritized opportunities, customer interview analysis, benchmarking and functional directions for discussing the future tool. The documented value was making relationships visible across teams and giving change conversations more context.

  • Traceable diagnosis

    Findings connected to process, teams and service moments.

  • Shared priorities

    Opportunities reviewed with leaders.

  • Product foundation

    Criteria and capabilities to guide a future tool.

Learnings

Traceability is also a design decision

A project with many interviews and workshops can produce volume without clarity. Synthesis had to preserve who contributed each perspective, where a friction appeared and how it connected to the next decision.

Mapping the service before the interface revealed handoffs, dependencies and problems no isolated screen could explain.

Boundaries

Diagnosis and direction, not implemented impact

  • There is no implementation follow-up or later efficiency, satisfaction, adoption or business metrics.
  • Prioritized opportunities and functional directions are project proposals, not features documented as built.
  • Research, workshops and overarching decisions were collective work; they are not attributed to one person.
  • The client team built the prototypes; at that stage I contributed criteria and feedback.
  • The case and public evidence remain anonymized.