Asset Hierarchy Management Platform
A unified system to model, install, and manage assets across large physical environments
Context & Scope
TEAM
1 Designer, 4 Engineers
MY ROLE
Lead Product Designer
TIMELINE
6 Months (2025)
TOOLS
Figma, Jira, Miro
The Problem
Complex asset hierarchies across large physical environments often break at the point of field installation, where misalignment between desktop-defined structures and mobile field workflows leads to incorrect placement and unreliable asset data.
My Contribution
As Lead UX Designer, I led discovery and system design across desktop hierarchy creation and mobile, scan-first field workflows, partnering with product and engineering to deliver a scalable, domain-agnostic asset management experience.
Overview
Large physical environments rely on accurate asset hierarchies to manage installation and operations.These hierarchies are created on desktop by operations teams and executed on mobile by field agents. This project focused on bridging this gap through a unified, two-part experience. Desktop tools support scalable hierarchy creation and governance.
Mobile, scan-first workflows ensure assets are installed correctly in the field.
THE OUTCOME
Reliable asset hierarchies on desktop, executed accurately in the field
+20%
Asset installation confidence
-60%
ad-hoc asset groupings per quarter
Discovery & Research
Discovery and research focused on how asset hierarchies are created and used across industries. The approach combined contextual interviews with field teams and virtual walkthroughs of real installation workflows. Existing hierarchies were audited to uncover structural gaps and inconsistencies. These insights highlighted how scale, sequencing, and on-site realities impact hierarchy accuracy and usability.
24
STAKEHOLDER
INTERVIEWS
7
VIRTUAL SITE
VISITS
1800+
ASSET RECORDS ANALYSED
The Environment
Always changing sites
Field Engineers work in locations where work is still going on. Things move, change, and get added every day.
Incomplete information
Engineers often have limited details on site. Asset Managers rely on this information to understand what’s been built and what’s still pending.
One shared system
Many teams update the same assets. E.g. if one engineer names or places an asset incorrectly, managers may see wrong reports or miss maintenance later.
Research Insights
Field users think physically, not structurally. They navigate sites using areas, zones, floors, and systems, not abstract hierarchy trees.
Hierarchy is built, not planned. Most asset structures are created on site during installation, not carefully designed upfront.
One structural model works across domains
Despite differences in asset types, the hierarchy logic remained consistent across industries.
Site → Area / Zone → System → Equipment → Component
Installation is the Highest-Risk moment and hierarchy-related errors originated at the time of installation, not during later updates.
Field and office see different worlds. What makes sense on site doesn’t always match how Asset Managers need to view or report assets.
THE STRATEGY
Define centrally.
Complete in the field.
Asset Managers define the blueprint—the core hierarchy, structure, and standards that keep the system stable. Field Engineers build within that blueprint, completing installations and adding approved end nodes where work actually happens. The experience protects the blueprint while giving the field just enough freedom to finish the job correctly.
Lock core hierarchy structure defined by Asset Managers.
Allow controlled field additions only at approved end nodes.
Make the impact of field changes visible before they affect the system.
User Persona
Based on the research and synthesis we came up with 2 personas.
The new Asset Hierarchy workflow
From creation to installation-without breaking the structure
01
Create the structure
Asset Managers define and lock the core hierarchy, standards, and naming upfront.
02
Install Safely
Field Engineers install assets using the predefined structure. Only approved end nodes can be added or updated, keeping changes safely contained.
03
Validate before Save
Every end-node addition is checked against hierarchy rules, required attributes, and naming standards before it’s saved—preventing errors at the source.
THE NEW DESKTOP EXPERIENCE
Create clearly. Control structure.
Scale with confidence.
MOBILE EXPERIENCE
Install with clarity. Make fewer mistakes.
Move on faster.
Experience the Mobile workflow
Static screens can only tell half the story. We built high-fidelity prototypes to test the physics of our flow & interactions.
Validation & Testing
Before rollout, we ran 2 rounds of moderated usability testing with Asset Managers and Field Engineers using realistic site-setup and installation scenarios (new site creation, phased installs, missing assets, naming corrections). The goal was to validate clarity, correctness, and confidence during hierarchy creation and end-node additions, rather than raw speed alone.
Task Success rate
90% participants completed the task without moderator intervention.
User satisfaction score
4.7/5 for 10 sessions
Testing Feedback
“I can clearly see what I’m allowed to change and what I shouldn’t touch. That alone removes a lot of anxiety.”
FIELD ENGINEER,, USABILITY TESTING
“Once the structure is set, I don’t worry about it breaking later. The system protects it.”
ASSET MANAGER, moderated testing
The Impact
−18%
Hierarchy rework during setup
−24%
Invalid asset entries
01
Consistent hierarchy standard
ASSET MANAGER, PILOT TESTING
"
I’m less worried about cleaning things up later. The structure holds even when multiple teams are installing in parallel.
What I Learned
Creation is a design responsibility, not just a setup task
How hierarchies are created shapes everything downstream—from installation to maintenance and reporting.
Field flexibility must be intentional
Allowing only end-node changes gave engineers freedom to work on site without risking structural integrity.
Rules scale better than training
Validation embedded in the workflow reduced reliance on documentation and tribal knowledge.
Clarity prevents rework more than speed
Helping users understand what’s allowed upfront mattered more than making actions faster.
Shared structure aligns teams silently
When both roles operate within the same constraints, coordination improves without added process.