top of page
Case Study:
Process at scale
Role
UX Director
Company
Expedia Group
Team Size
20
Years
2019-2024
When I first joined Expedia, the design team faced a unique set of challenges that needed addressing to achieve meaningful growth and scalability. At the time, the team consisted of only one designer who was responsible for supporting five different products. Product managers from each product frequently requested design work, often without any coordination, which led to a bottleneck that made it nearly impossible to progress in any specific direction.
Over the course of five years, I led the transformation of this under-resourced and over-randomized design function into a globally scalable, agile team of over 20 designers. This team, spanning multiple geographies, not only supported product teams more effectively but also introduced structural practices that ensured sustained impact and growth.
Challenge 1
Building a Scalable Design team from scratch
I needed to go from a single designer juggling multiple, uncoordinated requests to a structured design team with the capacity to work across geographies and integrate with cross-functional squads effectively.
Approach
Cross functional partnerships
I developed close working relationships with product and engineering leadership through regular 1:1s, joint team ceremonies, and collaborative roadmap and concept development sessions. This approach fostered alignment, trust, and open communication across teams, which was essential for advocating for additional design headcount and enhancing the team’s strategic impact.
Defining workflows
I initiated a more organized workflow by introducing a Kanban board and a structured story template for product managers to request design support. This created transparency, allowing all stakeholders to visualize the design workload and prioritize requests more strategically.
Establishing Design sizing standards
Implementing design sizing standards made it easier to assess workload and future headcount needs. By formalizing this process, we could anticipate and plan for resource requirements more effectively.
Challenge 2
Implementing Agile Methodologies and Structure as the team grew
Over the course of 5 years the team would grow significantly, not just in size, but also responsibility, impact and influence. The structure of the team needed to be modular and repeatable. I introduced structural frameworks inspired by my prior experience with SAFe Agile. This structure allowed us to maintain cohesion and clear workflows as we grew from a small team to a multi-faceted design function.
Approach
Adapting Agile, cross functional principles
We adopted Agile methodologies, including user story templates, story pointing, and cross-functional squads. We established shared ceremonies where all relevant stakeholders—designers, PMs, and developers—could participate. These practices ensured transparency and alignment.
Weekly Board Reviews
Every Monday, we conducted board reviews where PMs and developers could add details to design stories. Designers led the meetings, providing updates on their progress, discussing story sizing, and outlining resources required. This routine fostered early clarity and consistent communication, which quickly became a model adopted by other teams.
Bi-weekly Design Reviews
Operating on a sprint cadence, we held design reviews every two weeks. The design board guided these reviews, framing how we assessed design solutions and ensuring alignment with broader product goals.
Outcomes
Better visibility into the work
The structured, agile approach implemented gave the team the ability to better size and prioritize work, which led to better project resource assessments and a stronger alignment between feature development, business goals, and user needs
Improved
Design quality
By embedding more traditional design review exercises into our sprint cycles and anchoring our focus to the user problems being solved, we were not only able to improve the overall success of our product design choices, but also drive craft improvement among members of the team
Measureable Impact
From higher user testing scores to significant customer support call reductions, our collaboration with product and research on user story creation made it easy to keep our solutions aligned with user and business goals.
Broad influence
Our agile methodologies and collaborative structures became a template that other teams adopted, recognizing the productivity, clarity, and improved communication they brought to the design process.
My evolving perspective on leadership
As I expanded the team, my leadership philosophy evolved, focusing on fostering a collaborative, flexible, and autonomous culture.
Embrace a partnership model
Inspired by the copywriter/art director pairing in Chicago ad agencies, I encouraged managers and lead ICs to build tight partnerships with their cross-functional counterparts. This approach minimized reliance on a “core” design team, instead emphasizing squad ownership and empowering designers to make impactful decisions alongside their counterparts.
Individualized Management
Recognizing that no two individuals are the same, I avoid a one-size-fits-all management style. Instead, I adapted my approach to fit each designer’s unique strengths and motivations, fostering an environment where individuals could thrive on their own terms.
Standards vs. Rules
I prioritized setting high standards over imposing rigid expectations. This approach allowed team members to manage their time and work style with flexibility, focusing more on meeting collaboration standards and delivering high-quality work than adhering to strict policies on time and location.
Servant Leadership
My leadership style centers around servant leadership. I operated with a reverse pyramid mentality, focusing on removing obstacles and providing resources that enabled my team to succeed. This approach empowered designers to lead in their areas of expertise.
Community and Organic Culture
While the team operated within squads, I prioritized building a strong design community through shared ceremonies, design-centric events, and a welcoming approach to teams building their own connections and culture. This community-focused approach provided a support system that encouraged organic team growth and camaraderie.
Research as a team sport
Research and insights are collective responsibilities. This philosophy ensures that design decisions are informed by data and insights, with the entire team contributing to and valuing the research process.
bottom of page