Design Systems · Partner Tools · Mobile · Revi
An org-wide redesign to fix what a marketing-built design system had broken: color that confused instead of guided, tools that partners couldn't use on mobile, and a CTA that read like a warning.
The Problem
Revi's original design system wasn't built by a product designer. It was assembled by a marketing team optimizing for brand boldness, not usability. The result: a system where orange was the primary CTA color across every surface.
The issue wasn't aesthetic. Orange is cognitively adjacent to red. It carries a "caution" or "warning" signal for most users. As a CTA, it created hesitation exactly where you need confidence. Meanwhile, our two distinct audiences (consumers and partners) shared the same color language, making it harder for partners to feel like the tools were made for them.
The Core Decision
How We Did It
With limited resources, I worked side-by-side with a developer through the entire redesign. No handoff phase. We were iterating and shipping in parallel. That constraint forced clarity: every decision had to be implementable immediately, not aspirational.
I audited every surface in the product, mapped color usage against user intent, and built a revised component set that honored the existing system's structure while correcting its semantic mistakes. The goal wasn't a full rewrite. It was high-leverage fixes that would unlock everything else.
Documented every color application across consumer and partner surfaces. Identified where orange was creating confusion versus where it was genuinely working. Built the case for the color split.
Removed orange from partner CTAs entirely. Promoted secondary brand colors to primary interactive roles in the partner dashboard. Tested with partners for instinct: did the new button feel "clickable" without being explained?
Partner tools hadn't been designed for mobile. They were functional on desktop and broken on phones. Rebuilt component layouts for touch, adjusted data table patterns for narrow viewports, and validated with partners who primarily access from their phones.
No spec-and-wait. I was in the codebase, reviewing implementations, and adjusting designs to match what was actually buildable in our timeline. That partnership compressed the delivery significantly.
Outcome
Honest Reflection
What we shipped was meaningful. The color system is semantically correct now, mobile works, and partners have tools that feel like they were made for them. But the foundation is still a marketing-built system that grew organically over years with too many cooks.
The data-heavy surfaces (tables, charts, dashboards) need a real typographic and layout system built around legibility and density, not brand expression. That work wasn't possible in the time we had. It's the redesign underneath the redesign, and it's the one I'd push for if I were starting fresh.