An Identity and Access Management (IAM) system that enables organizations to manage user identities, control access to applications and resources, and enforce security policies through centralized user and permission management. My contribution focused on UI design, translating complex administrative workflows into clear, intuitive interfaces for managing users, roles, and access permissions.
Project Overview
Identity and Access Management (IAM) programs are complex ecosystems of platforms, policies, processes, and technologies. For organizations managing digital identities and access privileges, clarity is critical. IAM systems help improve security, increase productivity, track irregularities, and give users access to the technologies their companies rely on.
This project focused on redesigning key parts of an IAM Program Management platform. The product brought multiple IAM platforms into one centralized experience, helping users build a roadmap, monitor progress, and mature their IAM program over time.
The work centered on improving several existing areas of the application: the Life Cycle screen for viewing program metrics, the Identity Roadmap for tracking maturity progress and recommended actions, the Maturity Assessment screen for reviewing periodic assessment results, and the Metrics Detail View for deeper analysis of numerical data.
The goal was not simply to make the interface look better. The goal was to make a technical, information-heavy product easier to understand, more consistent with the product’s logic, and more ready for development.
Challenge
The existing designs contained the right product intentions, but they were not yet ready for development. Several screens did not accurately reflect how the system operated, and parts of the interface created potential usability and comprehension issues.
The main challenge was to translate a complex IAM process into clearer product experiences. The interface needed to support users who were looking at program maturity, performance metrics, recommended actions, and assessment results, without forcing them to interpret disconnected visual systems or unclear terminology.
A second challenge was consistency. Some parts of the application needed redesign, while other screens were not in scope for major changes. This meant the redesigned screens had to improve clarity while still aligning with the existing brand guidelines and the rest of the product experience.
Design Approach
The redesign was shaped through a series of conversations, interviews, and consultations with the client and IAM experts. Because IAM was a specialized domain, understanding the logic behind the platform was essential before making design decisions.
The process involved evaluating the existing screens, identifying usability and visual hierarchy issues, clarifying terminology, testing layout alternatives, and refining how complex data should be presented. Each design decision had to serve both usability and domain accuracy.
The work was guided by a few key principles:
Make technical information easier to scan and understand.
Align the interface with how the IAM program actually operates.
Reduce visual noise and remove unnecessary ambiguity.
Preserve consistency with existing product screens and brand guidelines.
Create designs that could move confidently into development.
Key Redesign Areas
Life Cycle Screen
One of the first issues identified was terminology. The team had been using “Dashboard,” “Timeline,” and “Life Cycle” interchangeably. While the internal team understood these terms, this inconsistency had the potential to confuse users.
I proposed standardizing the terminology and using one consistent label. The team settled on Life Cycle, which better represented the structure and purpose of the page.
The screen contained sections for each stage in the Life Cycle, with cards showing metrics from the past few months. In the initial design, the meaning of the elements was not immediately clear. Some symbols and indicators only became understandable after a conversation with the client, which suggested that the interface was relying too much on explanation rather than clear visual communication.
The redesign focused on making trends and performance easier to interpret at a glance. I refined the metric cards, removed irrelevant colors that added visual noise, and adjusted the page sectioning to create a clearer and more organized view.
The objective was to help the user understand the status of each Life Cycle stage without needing to decode the interface.
Initial design:
Proposed design:
Maturity Assessment
The Maturity Assessment screen displayed data from a quiz that users completed regularly. It showed the program’s performance, quiz-based scores, and peer insights.
The original design included the necessary information, but the layout did not group related content effectively. Some items appeared close to each other despite having weak relationships, while directly related information was placed in less intuitive areas of the page.
My redesign focused on improving proximity, grouping, and hierarchy. Related information was arranged together so users could better understand how the assessment results, program performance, and peer insights connected.
This change made the page easier to read and helped the assessment data feel more structured and meaningful. Instead of presenting multiple pieces of information side by side without a clear relationship, the revised layout supported a more logical flow of interpretation.
Metrics Detail
The Metrics Detail View was a modal that showed more detailed information about a metric from the Life Cycle screen.
In the original design, quantitative data over a selected period of time was shown through a bar graph. Above it, a Red-Amber-Green indicator showed how the numbers performed in relation to a threshold set by the user.
While the intention was useful, the layout was complicated and difficult to scale. It separated the number, trend, and performance status into different visual areas, which made the user work harder to understand the relationship between them.
I redesigned the modal by replacing the bar graph and separate RAG indicators with a filled line graph. This allowed the quantitative data and trend to be shown in one visual system. To represent threshold numbers, I added amber and green lines directly on the graph.
This approach made the data more compact and easier to interpret. The user could now see the metric value, performance trend, and threshold relationship in a single view rather than reading them across separate sections.
Metrics Detail View:
Identity Roadmap
The Identity Roadmap represented the actions required for an IAM program to mature. In the initial design, there were three stages, and each stage contained the same four domains: Governance, Identity, Auth, and PAM.
Users needed to complete recommended actions under each domain to complete a stage. Each domain operated independently, and users could start with any activated domain. However, they could only proceed to the next stage of a domain after completing the previous stage.
The original layout made this logic difficult to understand. Because the design grouped content by stage, the progression of each independent domain felt visually disconnected. The page was called a roadmap, but it did not visually behave like one. It was also difficult to present recommendations in a way that made sense because each domain had its own path, while each stage still depended on its precursor.
Initial roadmap:
The redesign reframed the roadmap around the independence of each domain. Each domain was given a clearer roadmap-like layout, with connected stages that better represented progression. This made the path of each domain easier to follow while still showing the relationship between stages.
I also replaced the shape-fill progress indicator with a hexagonal progress bar to create a cleaner and more uniform visual system. The revised structure made it easier to display action recommendations because each domain now had a more logical space for its next steps.
Proposed roadmap:
Results
The redesign required a careful balance of product logic, visual clarity, and domain accuracy. Through conversations, experimentation, and expert consultation, the redesigned screens were reviewed by IAM experts and deemed suitable for the platform’s process.
The client was pleased with the work, and the designs were immediately prepared for development. The outcome also built trust with the client. When I was reassigned to another project, the client expressed that they would like to have me back on the IAM project when possible.
This project was especially meaningful because IAM was initially an unfamiliar domain. To produce an effective redesign, I had to learn the product logic quickly, understand the client’s process, and translate complex technical requirements into interfaces that were clearer, more organized, and easier to act on.
The final designs helped move the product closer to a development-ready experience while giving users a clearer way to understand IAM maturity, performance, and recommended next steps.
