04 / Senior Product Designer · Zertiban

Making trust easier to understand and use.

2023 · 2024 · Fintech · Regulated products

Electronic signatures, identity verification and regulated processes created a product experience where clarity and trust were inseparable. I helped simplify the core journeys and established a scalable design system that gave the product greater consistency.

An abstract structure of connected forms.
Role[ROLE]
Scope[SCOPE]
Key partners[KEY PARTNERS]
Primary responsibility[PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY]
Product stage[PRODUCT STAGE]
Status[STATUS]

The situation

[ONE STRONG STATEMENT DESCRIBING THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEM]

[160–220 WORD NARRATIVE · the product, business and organisational situation Mariana entered. Combines context, stakes and mandate: what was happening, why it could not remain unresolved, and how her responsibility was framed against what the situation actually required.]

Initial ask

[The brief as originally framed by the organisation.]

Real need

[What the situation actually required once examined.]

My responsibility

[What Mariana owned end-to-end within that mandate.]

[ECOSYSTEM OR BEFORE-STATE MAP] · 16:9 · min 1600px wide

Three decisions

The three decisions that changed the direction of the product.

Decision 01

[DECISION 01 TITLE]

[80–110 WORDS · what Mariana observed, what she decided and why, told as one continuous paragraph. Weave signal, choice and rationale together rather than listing them separately.]

Trade off[One short line naming what was deprioritised, rejected or explicitly accepted as cost.]

[DECISION 01 EVIDENCE] · 4:3 or 3:2 · min 1600px wide
Decision 02

[DECISION 02 TITLE]

[80–110 WORDS · an integrated narrative that shows what Mariana observed, what she decided, why, and what was accepted or rejected as a consequence.]

Trade off[One short line naming the trade-off carried by this decision.]

[DECISION 02 EVIDENCE] · 4:3 or 3:2 · min 1600px wide
Decision 03

[DECISION 03 TITLE]

[80–110 WORDS · a single paragraph carrying signal, choice, reasoning and consequence. No form fields, no bullet lists.]

Trade off[One short line naming what this decision cost or deferred.]

[DECISION 03 EVIDENCE] · 4:3 or 3:2 · min 1600px wide

Leading the organisation

Leading the organisation through the decision.

[ONE CONCRETE SITUATION STATEMENT · where perspectives diverged.]

[120–160 WORDS · the competing perspectives, the decision Mariana structured, the agreement reached and what teams could do afterwards. Show leadership through consequences, not activity.]

Who needed to align

[Executives, functions and disciplines that had to converge.]

What was resolved

[The alignment or decision that unlocked movement.]

What remained open

[What was deliberately left unresolved and why.]


From direction to product

How the strategic decisions became a real product.

[PRODUCT OVERVIEW · SHORT DESCRIPTIVE TITLE]

[PRODUCT OVERVIEW · FULL WIDTH] · 16:9 · min 2000px wide

[CRITICAL WORKFLOW · SHORT DESCRIPTIVE TITLE]

[CRITICAL WORKFLOW · HORIZONTAL] · horizontal · min 1800px wide

[PRODUCT OR SYSTEM DETAIL · SHORT DESCRIPTIVE TITLE]

[PRODUCT OR SYSTEM DETAIL] · 3:2 · min 1800px wide

What changed

What changed for the product, the organisation and the team.

Product

[ONE STRONG PRODUCT OUTCOME]

[Up to two supporting observations.]

Organisation

[ONE STRONG ORGANISATIONAL OUTCOME]

[Up to two supporting observations.]

Team

[ONE STRONG TEAM OUTCOME]

[Up to two supporting observations.]

[70–100 WORDS · one reflection paragraph: what Mariana would keep, what she would change, and what this project changed in how she leads.]


Next case

Designing within an international product organisation.

[ONE SHORT SENTENCE ON THE DIFFERENT CAPABILITY THIS CASE DEMONSTRATES.]

Explore CoverWallet
Architectural lines organising space and movement.