PROS O&D

PROS's flagship revenue management tool, O&D, was built in 1985 on Adobe Flash. With Flash hitting end-of-life in 2017, a migration was already planned. The default plan: lift and shift, no user research, same product in a new container. I pushed for something different.

ANOMALIES AT A GLANCE
Company
PROS, 2018
Role
Lead UX Designer
Duration
1 year
Team
3 PMs · 11 Engineers
Redesigned PROS O&D dashboard shown on a MacBook

The challenge

So, what's the problem?

PROS had never talked directly to the analysts using the product. Requirements came from external SMEs. I made the case to Product leadership that skipping research wasn't saving time, it was carrying risk forward. I got buy-in for a worldwide customer research tour. We interviewed analysts across multiple airlines and countries. Three things came back that changed the project entirely.

Analysts at different airlines followed nearly identical workflows, which invalidated PROS's "everything accessible everywhere" navigation built for 100+ screens. Users maintained offline files and parallel tools to validate their own decisions, a sign they didn't trust the application's data. And they spent as little time in the UI as possible, scanning for anomalies and leaving. The product needed to be fast, transparent, and built around a real workflow, not around feature coverage. Those findings shifted the brief from feature-parity migration to workflow redesign. Executive buy-in followed the research.

How I approached it

1

From insights to decisions

Building shared direction before committing to design

  • Before moving to design, I ran a design workshop with PMs and engineers. The goal was to get diverse thinking on the table before anyone committed to a direction.
  • The workshop produced two things worth keeping: a workflow-tailored approach to market analysis that shaped the overall IA, and the heat map visualization for the Availability page, which came directly out of the collaborative sketching.
  • Neither would have surfaced from a solo design process.
2

The UX Design

Navigation, prototype, and the Availability page

  • Replaced the right-rail navigation with a two-level structure that encoded the actual analyst workflow into the interface.
  • Built a working prototype to pressure-test the pattern with stakeholders before any development commitment. The prototype was high-fidelity: Axure RP with dynamic heat map visualizations driven by real Excel data.
  • On the Availability page, the data density was extreme. Research showed analysts scan 5–10 markets looking for anomalies, not reading everything. Low availability means revenue loss, so speed matters. Designed color-coding by filter to make problems visible at a glance.
  • Implemented colorblind-safe palettes across all 100+ screens — a gap the legacy product had never addressed.
  • Used the PROS KIT design system to maintain consistency across the full screen count without slowing delivery.

From the process

UX research findings slide and ethnographic study photos from analyst observations
Research findings from the worldwide customer research tour, with photos from the observation and interview phases.
Original PROS O&D legacy interface — Blended Forecast Analysis screen with 100+ screen right-rail navigation
The legacy Flash-era interface with "everything accessible everywhere" navigation built for 100+ screens.
Original O&D navigation vs redesigned O&D navigation
Original vs redesigned navigation. The new two-level structure encoded the actual analyst workflow into the interface.
Redesigned PROS O&D availability page with color-coded heat map
The redesigned Availability page — color-coding by filter makes problems visible at a glance, with colorblind-safe palettes applied across all 100+ screens.

The solution

Did it work?

The product launched in 2018. PROS could now reach price-sensitive airlines the on-premise model had excluded.

The more durable outcome was organizational. Product leadership shifted how they valued UX investment. Before this project, research was overhead. After it, research was how decisions got made. I got there by framing the investment in terms leadership already cared about: reducing risk, not improving design.

I also used the project to build the team's capability. The workshops weren't just ideation sessions. They were deliberate practice in research synthesis and collaborative decision-making. The designers and PMs who went through that process came out with a different instinct for how to work.

What it delivered

2018
Product launchedPROS could now reach price-sensitive airlines the on-premise model had excluded
100+
Screens deliveredConsistent design across the full screen count using PROS KIT design system
Shifted
How leadership valued UXBefore this project, research was overhead. After it, research was how decisions got made
Built
Team capabilityDesigners and PMs who went through the process came out with a different instinct for how to work

Key factors

  1. Strategic Framing

    Positioned research as business risk mitigation rather than design preference, securing executive buy-in

  2. Collaborative Leadership

    Used workshops to create shared ownership of design direction, reducing implementation friction

  3. Evidence-Based Design

    Let research insights drive decisions, building credibility for UX's strategic role

  4. Systems Thinking

    Leveraged design system to scale impact across 100+ screens efficiently

  5. Cross-Functional Partnership

    Partnered with Product and Engineering as strategic equals, not service providers

Reflection

PROS had never talked directly to the analysts using the product. Skipping research wasn't saving time — it was carrying risk forward. The research tour changed everything: the brief, the scope, and ultimately how the business valued UX investment.