Complaint & Feedback Lifecycle Modernization
A large regional bank's complaint and employee-feedback systems had grown into a patchwork of disconnected tools, inconsistent categorization, and manual workarounds. This project reimagined the end-to-end lifecycle, from the moment an issue is raised to the moment a fix is verified, for the seven types of employees and customers who touch it.
My Role: UX Research, Product Strategy, UX Design, Stakeholder Workshops
Methods and Tools: Discovery Interview, Thematic Analysis, Persona Development, Validation Workshop, Prioritization Exercise & Concept Creation, Future-State Journey Mapping
The Problem Space
Complaints entered through a dozen disconnected channels. Employees retyped the same issue three or four times per case because no field talked to any other. Once a complaint or feedback was logged, it disappeared into a black box, no visible owner, no status, no way to know if it was ever actually fixed.
“My team works out of 20 different systems just to do research.”
Discovery
We started by understanding how complaint handling actually worked across the organization, who touched a complaint, what systems they relied on, where handoffs happened, and where people were creating workarounds to get the job done
01. Kickoff & Stakeholder Alignment
Before writing a single interview question, we reviewed existing process documentation and worked with the core team to map who needed to be at the table.
Complaint handling touches frontline banking, contact centers, compliance, legal, risk, IT, and multiple lines of business — each with a different relationship to the same system.
This mapping shaped the 13+ stakeholder groups selected for discovery.
We also ran periodic stakeholder alignment syncs throughout the project to keep leadership updated between formal milestones.
02. Discovery Interviews
Because a compliance specialist and a frontline banker experience the same system completely differently, we created a distinct interview guide for each role rather than relying on a single generic script.
Every session followed a consistent arc:
Understand the role → Walk through the lifecycle → Identify pain points → Explore opportunities
This allowed us to compare experiences across very different roles while still surfacing the nuances of each one.
03. Synthesize & Make Sense
With perspectives coming from 13+ stakeholder groups, the challenge was moving beyond individual anecdotes to understand the patterns connecting them.
Each transcript was coded stage by stage across the complaint lifecycle:
Capture → Research → Resolve & Close → Insights → Root Cause → Hand-off
We tagged what was happening today, the pain points and needs raised, and opportunity ideas volunteered by stakeholders. Verbatim quotes were preserved alongside each coded point so the context behind each finding wasn't lost during synthesis.
-
Before writing a single interview question, we reviewed existing process documentation and worked with the core team to map who needed to be at the table.
Complaint handling touches frontline banking, contact centers, compliance, legal, risk, IT, and multiple lines of business — each with a different relationship to the same system.
This mapping shaped the 13+ stakeholder groups selected for discovery.
We also ran periodic stakeholder alignment syncs throughout the project to keep leadership updated between formal milestones.
-
Because a compliance specialist and a frontline banker experience the same system completely differently, we created a distinct interview guide for each role rather than relying on a single generic script.
Every session followed a consistent arc:
Understand the role → Walk through the lifecycle → Identify pain points → Explore opportunities
This allowed us to compare experiences across very different roles while still surfacing the nuances of each one.
-
With perspectives coming from 13+ stakeholder groups, the challenge was moving beyond individual anecdotes to understand the patterns connecting them.
Each transcript was coded stage by stage across the complaint lifecycle:
Capture → Research → Resolve & Close → Insights → Root Cause → Hand-off
We tagged what was happening today, the pain points and needs raised, and opportunity ideas volunteered by stakeholders. Verbatim quotes were preserved alongside each coded point so the context behind each finding wasn't lost during synthesis.
This synthesis gave us two critical outputs: a shared understanding of who experiences the system and a clear picture of where the system breaks down.
Personas
The complaint lifecycle is experienced differently depending on where someone sits in the system. We translated the research into seven role-based personas, each representing a distinct relationship with the complaint lifecycle.
Add a new, how 7 personas look-like Visual over here: leverage Figma Make for it.. Maybe overview + One persona deepdive through Figma Make. Maybe top 2?
Key Findings
Through our research, we— complete this line.. Also add pic from interivew and synthesis somewhere here.
—add small emojis below like the other projects. Add a view in deatil button for this iGUESS?
01
Lack of
Efficiency
The complaint system doesn't fit how people actually work, so complaints get skipped, rushed, or missed.
02
Inconsistent Taxonomy
There are no shared standards for how complaints should be captured, classified, or documented.
03
Lack of Connectivity
Complaints move through too many disconnected systems with no single thread holding them together.
04
Lack of
Visibility
Once a complaint is submitted, accountability and status effectively disappear.
05
Early-Stage Automation
Critical complaint work still depends heavily on individual effort and informal workarounds.
IMPLICATION
The bank is managing the complaints it knows about, not the full volume that exists, creating blind spots in risk, reporting, and customer experience.
The data reaching reporting and root-cause analysis is unreliable from the start.
Every handoff requires someone to rebuild context from scratch — adding time, increasing error risk, and forcing customers to repeat their story.
Untracked complaints resurface and resolutions remain inconsistent.
Key steps still depend on people manually coordinating work that could be system-supported.
Key Findings
Through our research, we— complete this line.. Also add pic from interivew and synthesis somewhere here.
—add small emojis below like the other projects. Add a view in deatil button for this iGUESS?
01
Lack of Efficiency
The complaint system doesn't fit how people actually work, so complaints get skipped, rushed, or missed.
02
Inconsistent Taxonomy
There are no shared standards for how complaints should be captured, classified, or documented.
KEY FINDINGS
Complaint logging is unintuitive and high-effort.
Logging can take 7–10 minutes in some cases.
Users avoid or delay logging under time pressure.
Actual complaint volume may therefore be higher than captured volume.
03
Lack of Connectivity
Complaints move through too many disconnected systems with no single thread holding them together.
04
Lack of
Visibility
Once a complaint is submitted, accountability and status effectively disappear.
05
Early-Stage Automation
Critical complaint work still depends heavily on individual effort and informal workarounds.
IMPLICATION
The bank is managing the complaints it knows about, not the full volume that exists, creating blind spots in risk, reporting, and customer experience.
The data reaching reporting and root-cause analysis is unreliable from the start.
Every handoff requires someone to rebuild context from scratch — adding time, increasing error risk, and forcing customers to repeat their story.
Untracked complaints resurface and resolutions remain inconsistent.
Key steps still depend on people manually coordinating work that could be system-supported.
Theme 01
To validate our redesigned flows, we conducted usability testing with both Account Managers and Admins, using a mix of remote and in-person sessions.
Participants were given guided tasks that reflected real scenarios — from onboarding a new client to submitting file pattern details with PHI.
We tested with Figma prototypes, encouraged users to think aloud, and captured both behavioral observations and direct quotes.
Key Findings
FROM
01. Admins often had to rely on Account Managers to create file patterns, leading to delays when key details were missed or overlooked.
02. There was no visibility into who made changes during the WIF or file pattern process, leading to confusion and accountability issues.
03. Account Managers struggled to find the right contact for WIF-related updates, often spending time calling multiple people for clarification.
04. Our usability testing results indicated that only 2/5 of users were able to edit the PHI with some guidance.
TO
Design and Strategic Implications
01. We enabled the editing of WIF for Admins, reducing back-and-forth and giving autonomy to correct gaps without delaying the workflow
02. We introduced version history across WIF and file pattern creation, ensuring transparency and traceability at every step
03. We clarified internal points of contact and streamlined escalation paths within the system to reduce time and confusion during updates..
04. We redesigned the PHI editing interface and introduced onboarding guidance to improve usability and boost user confidence.
Final High Fidelity Wireframes
Onboarding, Made Effortless with No More Guesswork
Replaced complex, offline onboarding with an in-app flow that’s trackable, streamlined, and transparent. Built-in rejection comments and real-time status updates keep users informed at every step.
Fast, Flexible Uploads
Users can drop in a sample file to auto-fill large datasets—no manual entry, no delays, reducing the overall cognitive load.
Bulk Editing for Power Users
Designed for advanced users, this feature enables editing of multiple datasets at once—speeding up workflows and boosting efficiency.
PHI Editing with Ease
Only 3 in 8 users could edit PHI with ease. We introduced a contextual slide-out panel that surfaces only when needed, reducing cognitive load and guiding users through a more focused, error-proof editing experience.
Track Every Change
Version history ensures accountability by logging all updates and preventing unauthorized changes.
Prototype
Success Metrics
60% Increase
in succesful approvals
86% Reduction
in Processing tIme
Conclusion
This project was a deep dive into cross-functional collaboration. Working with multiple stakeholders across UX, product, and architecture taught me the value of domain immersion and active alignment. Navigating different perspectives helped me sharpen not just my design thinking, but also my ability to translate complex requirements into usable, meaningful solutions.
Being open about our process, including where we needed time to explore solutions, helped manage expectations. Co-creating timelines and working plans with stakeholders not only kept the project on track but also created a more invested, collaborative environment
