Designing Across Government — Neetu Sajan
UX Consulting · Government Programs

Designing Across
Government.

UX consulting across government programs — helping public service teams clarify complex problems, align stakeholders, and move from discovery to design direction.

Senior UX Designer Experience Design Consultant 6+ ProgramsCivic Tech
6+Gov't Programs
5Methods Applied
5+Stakeholder Groups
01Design Practice
🔒

The artifacts and project details shown here are shared for portfolio and application review only. Some details have been anonymized, adapted, or redacted to protect confidential information. Please do not copy, distribute, or share without permission.

At a glance
6+Gov't Programs
5Methods Applied
5+Stakeholder Groups
01 — Overview

The context

I worked on an experience design consulting team that partnered with government agencies to improve public services, internal tools, and digital programs. Each engagement started in a different place. My role was to quickly understand the context, identify what kind of design support was needed, and create artifacts that helped teams make decisions.

I also helped strengthen the team's design practice by contributing to reusable templates, engagement materials, and design processes as the team grew.

"Government teams often knew something needed to improve — but the problem was not always clearly defined."

The challenges I navigated

ChallengeWhat that looked like in practice
Ambiguous problem spaces
Teams came in with broad goals like "improve the process," but the user pain points were unclear.
Multiple stakeholder groups
Program staff, policy teams, technical teams, leadership, and end users often had different priorities.
Projects already in progress
I often joined work midstream and had to quickly understand the history, constraints, decisions, and open questions.
Complex government workflows
Services were shaped by policy requirements, compliance needs, legacy systems, and operational constraints.
Limited time or user access
The design approach had to be practical, focused, and right-sized to each engagement.
02 — Consulting approach

Adapted to every team

I did not apply the same process to every project. I adapted the approach based on the team's needs, timeline, maturity, and constraints.

When a team needed…I focused on…Artifacts I created
Problem clarity
Understanding the ask, defining users, clarifying constraints, and identifying the right design questions.
Intake notes, problem statements, opportunity areas.
Stakeholder alignment
Facilitating working sessions and turning scattered feedback into shared priorities.
Workshop boards, journey maps, prioritization matrices.
User understanding
Researching user needs, pain points, workflows, and service barriers.
Research plans, testing scripts, moderator guides, findings decks.
Fast usability insight
Evaluating existing tools when timelines or user access made research harder to run immediately.
Heuristic analysis, severity ratings, annotated findings, recommendations.
A tangible solution
Making abstract service problems visible through flows, wireframes, and prototypes.
User flows, wireframes, high-fidelity prototypes.
Long-term consistency
Creating reusable templates and patterns that helped the design team scale.
SOW templates, research templates, design templates.
03 — How I worked

Five moves, every engagement

01
Clarify the problem

Define the actual problem, users, constraints, and decisions that need to be made.

02
Understand the system

Look beyond the screen — understand policy, workflow, operational, and technical factors.

03
Facilitate alignment

Use workshops and visual artifacts to align teams around shared priorities.

04
Make it tangible

Create maps, flows, wireframes, and prototypes to make decisions easier.

05
Support handoff

Create documentation and templates so teams can continue the work.

04 — A closer look at my process

The artifact trail

How I moved teams from unclear requests to research-backed design direction. Each phase shows the work, not just the description.

Phase 01
Intake, SOW, and project scoping
Purpose — Turn a broad request into a focused design engagement.

I helped teams get aligned on what the actual problem was, who was affected, and what success looked like — before any design work began. Clear intake documents reduced rework and set the tone for collaborative engagement.

Scope of work document Timeline table Kickoff notes

What I did

  • Clarified the project ask, timeline, and success criteria
  • Identified users, stakeholders, dependencies, and known constraints
  • Captured project context through structured notes and intake questions
  • Helped define the right design approach for the team's stage of work

What this shows

Project leadership, consulting judgment, communication skills, and the ability to join work already in progress.

Phase 02
Discovery, mapping, and prioritization
Purpose — Make scattered project context visible so the team could align.

Discovery work wasn't just note-taking — it was active sense-making. I used Miro to turn stakeholder input into a shared surface where themes, pain points, and opportunities could be seen at a glance.

Journey map Prioritization exercise User flow map

What I did

  • Used Miro to capture stakeholder input, meeting notes, and discovery findings
  • Grouped notes into themes, pain points, open questions, and opportunities
  • Mapped current-state workflows and key handoffs
  • Prioritized pain points by impact and effort to identify quick wins and bigger bets

What this shows

Facilitation, synthesis, storytelling, multidisciplinary collaboration, and systems thinking.

Phase 03
Heuristic analysis
Purpose — Identify usability issues quickly and give the team an objective way to prioritize.

When timelines were tight or user access was limited, heuristic analysis let us move forward with informed recommendations. A consistent scoring method meant findings could be compared, debated, and acted on — not just read.

Heuristic analysis setup Miro board findings Synthesis slide

What I did

  • Reviewed existing screens against Nielsen Norman Group usability heuristics
  • Created a Miro-based evaluation template for consistent findings capture
  • Documented issues with severity ratings and design rationale
  • Defined a scoring method: critical, major, minor, positive, suggestions
  • Translated findings into practical recommendations the team could act on

What this shows

UX judgment, interaction design skill, accessibility awareness, and the ability to make progress under constraints.

Phase 04
User research planning and synthesis
Purpose — Structure research so findings drive decisions, not just documentation.

Good research doesn't start with questions — it starts with goals. I designed research plans that were scoped, trackable, and translatable: every session produced findings the team could act on, not just read.

Research planning template Research tracker Synthesis board Theme clusters

What I did

  • Defined research goals, participant criteria, and key questions
  • Created testing scripts, task prompts, and note-taking structures
  • Tracked participant sessions, consent status, device type, and facilitation roles
  • Grouped observations into themes to identify recurring pain points

What this shows

Human-centered design, research maturity, communication skills, and evidence-based decision-making.

Phase 05
Wireframing, prototyping, and design systems
Purpose — Translate research and requirements into tangible, reviewable designs.

Prototypes aren't deliverables — they're tools for decision-making. I used wireframes and prototypes to surface assumptions, test structure, and make abstract requirements concrete enough to act on.

Figma design board Figma file overview Design system board

What I did

  • Created user flows to clarify paths, decision points, and dependencies
  • Explored alternate flow options and screen states before moving toward final designs
  • Designed wireframes and prototypes to test structure, content, and interactions
  • Used reusable patterns and design system components where possible

What this shows

Visual design, interaction design, systems thinking, design systems experience, and end-to-end product design skills.

05 — Design principles

How I approach the work

👥
Human-centered

Grounded design decisions in user needs, pain points, and real workflows.

⚙️
Systems-minded

Considered the full service ecosystem — policy, operations, technology, and handoffs.

♿
Accessible and inclusive

Focused on clear content, usable patterns, and experiences that work for diverse users.

📋
Policy-aware

Balanced user needs with government requirements, compliance, and delivery constraints.

🧩
Pattern-driven

Used reusable design patterns and templates to create consistency across complex services.

🔭
Future-focused

Looked for opportunities to support data-informed decisions, emerging technology, and scalable delivery.

06 — Impact

What the work produced

Program impact

  • Supported 6+ government programs, services, and tools
  • Helped teams clarify complex problems and user needs
  • Created artifacts that supported decisions and delivery

Team impact

  • Supported a growing design consulting practice
  • Contributed to reusable templates and engagement materials
  • Helped create more consistent ways of scoping design work

Design impact

  • Made complex workflows easier to understand
  • Connected user needs with policy and operational requirements
  • Used design artifacts to align teams and move work forward
The biggest takeaway

"Design in government is not just about improving interfaces — it is about helping public service teams reduce complexity, work across constraints, and build services that better meet people's needs."

This experience shaped how I work in complex government environments — entering ambiguous projects, building trust quickly, and using design to create clarity.