When I came into ParkHub in 2017, there wasn't a design system in place. All user interface components were manually coded by the engineering team.
As we expanded our product offering and continued launching new features, it became increasingly difficult to maintain consistency and efficiency in the design and development process.
In an effort to address these scaling issues, I advocated for the implementation of a design system.
This consisted of a set of design guidelines, reusable components, and a design library that developers could access to ensure consistency and efficiency in the user interface design process.
Here’s a peek at our Figma “Design System” project and the pages in the sidebar.
The ParkHub Components section is where we move all of our most commonly used components such as text input fields and buttons.
Given the fact that we manage several different apps within our ecosystem, the “Style consolidation” page is used for collecting similar views across our product offering so we can do side-by-side comparisons.
The top row is where we collect all similar views, and the bottom row is where we choose the best-designed component that ought to replace all other views.
For example, here’s the comparison of various “Table” components.
This is the final table design for use in all of our screens, it’s refined from a visual perspective, and it has all the necessary amount of functionality.
Core to our design system was these widget components which we'd iterated based on customer feedback and ergonomic intuitions.
From 1 to 2 we reduced clutter inside the pie chart and made the widget's name more prominent. From 2 to 3 we experimented with a new visualization to reduce the vertical height of the cards, so that more widgets could be visible above the fold (i.e. reducing the need for users to scroll down to see more information)
From 3 to 4 we kept the idea of reducing the size of the pie chart, but we changed the key to be more visually modern as well as more skimmable, with each key-pair being a single row item.
The outcome of this work was that our design team was able to iterate more rapidly and get features out at a breathtaking pace.
It’s also helped us designers to think a bit more like engineers, in that we’re building reusable components with various states and parameters.
Months after leaving ParkHub, a past colleague of mine reached out thanking me for how rigorous and disciplined I’d been about maintaining our design system, he told me how much time it still saved him when it came to designing new screens.
That’s a win!
When I came into ParkHub in 2017, there wasn't a design system in place. All user interface components were manually coded by the engineering team.
As we expanded our product offering and continued launching new features, it became increasingly difficult to maintain consistency and efficiency in the design and development process.
In an effort to address these scaling issues, I advocated for the implementation of a design system.
This consisted of a set of design guidelines, reusable components, and a design library that developers could access to ensure consistency and efficiency in the user interface design process.
Here’s a peek at our Figma “Design System” project and the pages in the sidebar.
The ParkHub Components section is where we move all of our most commonly used components such as text input fields and buttons.
Given the fact that we manage several different apps within our ecosystem, the “Style consolidation” page is used for collecting similar views across our product offering so we can do side-by-side comparisons.
The top row is where we collect all similar views, and the bottom row is where we choose the best-designed component that ought to replace all other views.
For example, here’s the comparison of various “Table” components.
This is the final table design for use in all of our screens, it’s refined from a visual perspective, and it has all the necessary amount of functionality.
Core to our design system was these widget components which we'd iterated based on customer feedback and ergonomic intuitions.
From 1 to 2 we reduced clutter inside the pie chart and made the widget's name more prominent. From 2 to 3 we experimented with a new visualization to reduce the vertical height of the cards, so that more widgets could be visible above the fold (i.e. reducing the need for users to scroll down to see more information)
From 3 to 4 we kept the idea of reducing the size of the pie chart, but we changed the key to be more visually modern as well as more skimmable, with each key-pair being a single row item.
The outcome of this work was that our design team was able to iterate more rapidly and get features out at a breathtaking pace.
It’s also helped us designers to think a bit more like engineers, in that we’re building reusable components with various states and parameters.
Months after leaving ParkHub, a past colleague of mine reached out thanking me for how rigorous and disciplined I’d been about maintaining our design system, he told me how much time it still saved him when it came to designing new screens.
That’s a win!
When I came into ParkHub in 2017, there wasn't a design system in place. All user interface components were manually coded by the engineering team.
As we expanded our product offering and continued launching new features, it became increasingly difficult to maintain consistency and efficiency in the design and development process.
In an effort to address these scaling issues, I advocated for the implementation of a design system.
This consisted of a set of design guidelines, reusable components, and a design library that developers could access to ensure consistency and efficiency in the user interface design process.
Here’s a peek at our Figma “Design System” project and the pages in the sidebar.
The ParkHub Components section is where we move all of our most commonly used components such as text input fields and buttons.
Given the fact that we manage several different apps within our ecosystem, the “Style consolidation” page is used for collecting similar views across our product offering so we can do side-by-side comparisons.
The top row is where we collect all similar views, and the bottom row is where we choose the best-designed component that ought to replace all other views.
For example, here’s the comparison of various “Table” components.
This is the final table design for use in all of our screens, it’s refined from a visual perspective, and it has all the necessary amount of functionality.
Core to our design system was these widget components which we'd iterated based on customer feedback and ergonomic intuitions.
From 1 to 2 we reduced clutter inside the pie chart and made the widget's name more prominent. From 2 to 3 we experimented with a new visualization to reduce the vertical height of the cards, so that more widgets could be visible above the fold (i.e. reducing the need for users to scroll down to see more information)
From 3 to 4 we kept the idea of reducing the size of the pie chart, but we changed the key to be more visually modern as well as more skimmable, with each key-pair being a single row item.
The outcome of this work was that our design team was able to iterate more rapidly and get features out at a breathtaking pace.
It’s also helped us designers to think a bit more like engineers, in that we’re building reusable components with various states and parameters.
Months after leaving ParkHub, a past colleague of mine reached out thanking me for how rigorous and disciplined I’d been about maintaining our design system, he told me how much time it still saved him when it came to designing new screens.
That’s a win!
More articles about
ParkHub
More articles in
Work Experience
