Smarter request handling
Simplifying Field Service Workflows
Designed for service teams — streamline job tracking, time entry, and task management between engineers and requesters.
Project type: B2C Progressive Web App (PWA)
Role: UX and Product Designer
Industry: Maintenance Servicing
Quick Snapshot
Here’s the project in a nutshell: what we aimed for, how we got there, and what came out of it — all at a glance
Client :
Goal :
Design a seamless, user-friendly Progressive Web App (PWA) to replace the outdated legacy system—streamlining workflows and cutting duplicated effort for engineers on the field.
Project Type :
A legacy system redesign focused on creating a streamlined Progressive Web App (PWA) to enhance field engineers’ workflows and usability.
The False Problem
Engineers weren't resisting. The workflow was broken. Management blamed users, but my research revealed a process blocker.
The Real Blocker
Lean UX and audit pinpointed failure. Task Tracker phase was the choke point. Users simply got stuck, not stubborn.
The Fix First Approach
I rebuilt the worst step first: Task Tracker - the source of all drop-offs. One targeted fix enabled the rest of the workflows.
Proven Results
100% task completion after a full redesign. Engineers finished the digital process 60% faster; feedback flipped positive.
Curious how it all came together? Let’s break it down step by step.
Introduction
"We are facing a lot of resistance from the engineers when it comes to adopting this application into their workflow. We have to make it compulsory for all the engineers to use it."
The users
Adults between 35 - 50 years old that includes internal service engineers, managers from manufacturing companies, and internal ticket managers. However, the main bulk of the users are service engineers who are not very tech-savvy.
The product
Industrial Service Exchange (originally Siemens SWYFT) was developed to increase operational visibility, accelerate decision-making, and improve asset uptime by connecting Siemens customers, technicians, and service operations through a unified digital ecosystem.
The business goal
Drive Siemens' strategic shift toward digitalized service management by integrating real-time data, transparency, and collaboration into industrial service operations — transforming how Siemens delivered value to its customer.
The Challenge
Why are engineers still using paper?
After 8 years of patchwork updates and growing technical debt, the legacy platform had become a daily frustration for engineers in the field. Outdated interfaces, redundant data entry, and disconnected systems slowed everything down — from job tracking to report approvals.
The application suffers from a critical problem that is causing drop-off. Engineers couldn't complete their maintenance tickets in the old system due to a broken workflow path, forcing a fallback to paper and inefficient double work.
The problem statement
The legacy maintenance app was failing at its core purpose; enabling engineers to complete maintenance tickets digitally. Friction in the post-time entry workflow cause widespread task drop-offs, forcing the team back to paper. This inefficiency increased turnaround times, error rates, and frustration across the department.
How Did I Figure This Out?
Process Audit - Revealing Hidden Friction
To truly understand how engineers interacted with both web and mobile versions, I mapped the complete end-to-end user flow, from ticket assignment to customer sign-off.
What became clear was not a single "break," but a series of subtle inconsistencies and user frustrations embedded in the Task Tracker stage, depending on the platform.
Key Findings from Audit:
Shared Start: Both web and mobile users followed the same steps through ticket assignment, acceptance, and time selection. This consistency set clear expectations early on.
Divergence at Task Tacker: The experience sharply split at the tracking phase. One mobile, users could pause and resume tasks, naturally fitting real-world interruptions. On web, only "start" and "stop" actions existed - no pause or resume, no editing, and every stop required a brand new task to be created.
Consequence:
Engineers using web found themselves unable to adjust or resume time entries, leading to confusion and a sense of lost progress.
Many users abandoned digital tracking in favor of familiar paper timesheets, especially when forced to restart or when errors occurred mid-task.
Convergence: Both flows eventually merged for final summary and customer feedback, but by then, the majority of tracking data was incomplete or fragmented for web users.
Full Legacy App User Flow (Web + Mobile)
Ticket Assignment & Acceptance User Flow (Shared Flow)
Notes:
Engineer has no option to reject, reassign the ticket (forced acceptance).
Early Friction: lack of autonomy; cannot manage workload prioritization.
Time Selection & Preparation (Shared Flow)
Notes:
Both web and mobile allow viewing job scope, customer info, and location.
Engineer has not much option to select a suitable date and time other than what was provided.
This stage is consistent - no major usability differences yet.
Task Tracker (Divergent Flow)
Web App Branch
Web UX Breakdown Summary:
Users forced to manage rigid timer states - one-way only.
Forgetting to stop or errors mean lost data. Additional pain when user cannot make edits to the timer recorded during the summary report.
Frustration peaks; users abandon app, preferring paper over digital.
Mobile App Branch
Mobile UX Breakdown Summary:
Play/Pause/Resume adds layers of cognitive load.
User often confused about what state they're in.
Forgetting to resume timer is common, leading to unreliable logs.
Backend logic for time tracking is unintuitive and unforgiving.
Convergence - Final Steps (Unified Flow)
Notes: Regardless of platform, final hand-off and sign-off is handled via the engineer's mobile device. However, prior time-tracking issues mean data in the summary report is often incomplete. With no way to manually patch the mistakes, users are unable to move to the complete the ticket.
Audit Insights:
Across both platforms, engineers found the tracker unintuitive, error-prone, and a source of distraction rather than support.
Multiple user stories highlighted moments when engineers would leave timers paused for hours or forget entirely, leading to data inaccuracies.
Faced with these demands, users consistently transferred critical information to traditional paper timesheets, bypassing digital friction in favor of reliability.
Critical information not being recorded properly in the app causing the engineers to not be able to move to the next stage of the process, ultimately abandoning the app.
Impact:
Across both platforms, engineers found the tracker unintuitive, error-prone, and a source of distraction rather than support.
Multiple user stories highlighted moments when engineers would leave timers paused for hours or forget entirely, leading to data inaccuracies.
Faced with these demands, users consistently transferred critical information to traditional paper timesheets, bypassing digital friction in favor of reliability.
Critical information not being recorded properly in the app causing the engineers to not be able to move to the next stage of the process, ultimately abandoning the app.
Results:
Rather than streamlining fieldwork, the digital task tracker became a barrier - demanding attention, confusing users about their running state, and ultimately driving users to return to manual tracking. The audit showed that, despite having different mechanics, neither platform truly matched engineer's mental models or workflow needs.
User Interviews
To move beyond assumptions about "user resistance," I conducted a series of interviews with field engineers and supervisors. My goal was to understand their actual behaviors, challenges, and emotional responses to the legacy app's task tracking process. Especially where digital workflows failed and why paper was still preferred.
Interview Process:
Participants: 13 field engineers, 2 Senior Engineers
Method: Contextual, semi-structured interviews conducted onsite and vis video call.
Focus Areas:
Interaction with web/mobile app task tracker
Real-world workflows and interruptions
Points of frustration/confusion
Workarounds and paper fallback
Results:
100% of engineers experienced confusion during digital task tracking
Confusion was worsened by differences between mobile and web flows.
Engineers struggled to remember timer states (play, pause, resume), especially when switching between platforms.
90% frequently forgot to resume paused timers while working, resulting in missing or incomplete logs.
100% found paper timesheets simpler and more natural.
Paper-based tracking was the preferred workflow for every interviewee, dating to their earliest days on the job.
Final timesheets and summary reports were always hardcopies, manually entered into Excel for submission.
Engineers did not rely on, or even review in-app logs.
Once a tracked task ended, or before it even ends, they just left the timer running and abandoned the app, switching to their normal paper workflow.
Digital logs served mainly to "humor management" rather than for practical tracking and record keeping.
"I paused the timer, went for a tea break, and that's it. I forget. I just write everything down on my timesheet instead."
"We use the app because the company says to, but paperwork is the real record for both time and summary report. Its much easier, we can write as we work on the task."
"If I make a mistake, I just restart. But sometimes I'm on the third tracker for just a single task. After awhile i just give up and leave the timer running."
"It's always been paper to Excel. The app is for show. Even IF we use the app, we are still required to submit an Excel timesheet to the finance department at the end of the month."
Insights:
User Persona:
Benchmarking Against Modern UX Standards
To access the legacy app's effectiveness, I benchmarked its interface against leading modern enterprise and SaaS applications, referencing guidelines like Google Material Design, Apple's HIG, and service maintenance apps such as ServiceNow and Salesforce.
Key Findings from Audit:
Wasted Space:
The oversized banner image adds no value and pushes content down, reducing visible workspace.
The large embedded map dominates the screen, while only one job ticket is visible at a time.
Poor Information Density & Hierarchy:
Not all critical job info is visible at once; users must scroll within cards to even see basics like customer or status.
Important controls, like status, are not prominent. Repetitive elements (IDs, site names) clutter the screen.
Non-Responsive, Inefficient Layouts:
On any small window or device, essential details disappear, requiring horizontal/vertical scrolling.
Only one assignment can be seen or managed at a time, slowing workflows.
Poor Workflow Support:
Technicians cannot quickly move between jobs or see urgent/active assignments in context.
The UI does not prioritize the most common or valuable tasks.
Results:
Through benchmarking revealed critical space and workflow inefficiencies in the current UI. Addressing these gaps will modernize the interface; supporting quick access, clarify, and productivity aligned with the technician needs.
Before (Legacy)
Original intended view inside legacy wireframe.
Actual view when accessing web version on a 13" laptop.
After (Modern Recommendation)
Banner was kept initially as the project manager was quite resistant to it's removal. However, when the project shifted to a PWA approach later on, I manage to convince him using my design rationale.
These are the initial recommendation for the task timer on the mobile version as it was one of the key areas that needs to be fixed. Due to the agile approach, I decided to keep the the changes especially on the backend as minimal as possible. Focusing on usability and hierarchy.
My Mission
What Was I Tasked to Solve
Based on these findings, my core challenge was clear: I had to redesign the interface and workflow so that engineers could trust, efficiently use, and rely on the app for their time tracking and job management; without dependency on paper or Excel. My objectives focused on clarity, accessibility, and space optimization.
Core Focus Areas:
UX Overhaul, Not Reinvention
Redesigned key workflows within the current structure to make navigation and interaction more intuitive without disrupting existing user habits.
Simplified Task & Time Management
Proposed a cleaner task tracker and time entry system to reduce manual input and eliminate redundancy.
Smarter Reporting
Reworked the service summary report to make editing, reviewing, and submitting less tedious and more transparent.
Clearer Visual Hierarchy
Improved layout clarity using modular components and more meaningful groupings of information.
Foundation of PWA
Ensured the design was scalable and responsive, setting the stage for a smoother transition to a PWA in the future.
What I Changed
Evolution of the solution after Responsive and PWA decision.
Simplified Engineer Dashboard
The legacy dashboard forced engineers to view jobs one at a time, hiding basic info behind layers of scroll and clutter. Space was wasted on large banners and irrelevant elements, slowing down and frustrating field technicians.
The Objective
Deliver a redesigned dashboard that makes job management effortless; showing multiple assignments, key information, and contextual actions in a clear and responsive layout right from the start.
How I Fixed It
Optimize space and responsiveness to ensure engineers can scan multiple jobs within one list, and switch tabs between "Assigned", "In Progress", and "Closed" instantly.
Cards include all essential info up front: Ticket ID, Job Type, Dates, Involved People, Category Labels, and Current Status; no collapsing or hunting required.
Add a horizontal tab navigation to sort and filter job states, tailored for daily engineer needs.
Details panel on the right automatically updates based on selection; Full Job Info, Tasks, Media, Comments, and Timeline all in on screen.
Visual hierarchy simplified: subtle background, organized card layouts, clear action buttons for accepting, rejecting and adding tasks.
The Outcome
Engineers report a faster understanding of what's urgent, improved transparency for team jobs, and no more friction jumping between assignments. Field team productivity and satisfaction increased as the UI fits their workflow; especially on tablets and mobile.
Task Tracker: Flow & Redesign
The task tracker turns engineering teamwork into a simple, unified workflow; making it easy to record details, assign responsibility, and see progress at a glance. Every step is captured and instantly reflected for the whole team.
Journey Overview
The new task tracker enables engineers to seamlessly create, assign, and track job tasks; making it easy to capture precise work details and collaborate as a team.
Step-by-Step Flow with Mockups
Adding a New Task
Engineers click "Add Task" to begin. The interface makes it easy to initiate new work items with just one tab
Enter Task Details
A clean, focused comment section lets users capture all necessary information; task name, description, timing, and required resources. Reducing the risk of missing anything important or set definitions to the task.
Assign to a Team Member
Task can be instantly assigned to support engineers or collaborators for true teamwork. Engineers simply choose the teammate. Everyone's role is instantly clear.
Tracking Progress and Status
Task status is always visible. As work progresses, the lead engineer can see if the job assigned to support engineers has started or not. The lead will be able to see changes in real time.
Reflect in Summary Report
The created task description or instructions are automatically logged into the summary report section. This way nothing gets lost, engineers do not need to think back what they have done for the job. Everything is tracked for review and accountability.
UX Improvements & Outcomes
Clarity
Task details, ownership, and statuses are always visible; no hidden steps or missing information.
Efficiency
Engineers complete, assign, and track tasks faster, with fewer clicks and less confusion.
Teamwork
Collaboration is seamless. Support engineers instantly receive assignments and progress syncs for the whole team.
Accountability
Every action is logged and reflected in real time; task details in summary report require no manual chasing or double entry.
User Confidence
Field team trust the dashboard to capture all work, reducing errors and boosting overall satisfaction.
Task move faster, handoffs are smoother, and engineers spend less time managing, and more time solving real problems.
Effortless Summary Reporting
The legacy summary report suffered the same issue as the task tracker where web and mobile process differs. Engineers struggled with unclear steps, no option to correct mistakes, limited flexibility, and poor transparency; especially around breaks vs productive time.
The Objective
Merging both mobile and web workflows, ensuring workflow clarity, flexible, and trustworthy. Give users step-by-step guidance, easy error correction, flexible time tracking, and management-required transparency.
How I Fixed It
Optimize steppers to reflect the different steps they are currently in more clearly. Guiding them through man hours, reporting, review, and authentication.
Enable editing of task tracker timings for easy corrections.
Added clear fields to record and break down productive vs. breaktime hours, aligning reports to management's need for transparency.
Offer toggle between hardcopy and digital reporting, adapting to different preferred workflows of engineers.
Simplified report detail entry, with an "add another section" button so engineers could flexibly include all needed information; solving the problem of rigid, fixed report formats.
The Outcome
Engineers are grateful to the new flexibility. They now complete summary reports with less confusion and zero frustration. Error can be quickly fixed; time tracking is clear and meets management standards. Flexible entry fields make every report fit the job, not the other way round. The process works in both paper and digital environments, making data capture smooth for all teams.
Digital Sign-off
Obtaining client signatures was a bottleneck; engineers had to chase down clients for physical signoff or wait for them to be onsite, this is especially the case when the supervising personnel wasn't the one that does the sign-off. This led to delays, extra paperwork, and unfinished jobs stuck in limbo.
The Objective
Make closing jobs smoother by letting engineers submit reports immediately, with remote, secure options for client approval; no more unnecessary waiting.
How I Fixed It
Enable engineers to send the summary report for digital sign-off: clients can approve via secure OTP authentication or through a digital signature request, right from their device.
Once submitted, the job is automatically moved to "closed"; engineers never have to track down approvals in person.
Maintained full traceability and security for every sign-off, with all signatures and approvals archived in the system.
The Outcome
Engineers save valuable time. They submit, and move on. Clients sign wherever they are, using convenient digital methods. Closing jobs is now frictionless, faster, and paper-free, with transparent records for all sides.
Flexible Time Entry & Exporting Module
Not all engineer work fits inside maintenance tickets. Recurring or miscellaneous jobs; like weekly checks or one-off site visits, couldn't be tracked digitally through the ticketing system as such clients does not sent in request tickets. Time from tickets and ad-hoc work were never unified, causing double entry, missed records, and frustration.
The Objective
Give engineers a flexible time entry module for tracking any job, add series/repeat scheduling, and ensure easy, accurate export to finance; meeting management's digitalization goals without breaking legacy finance workflow.
How I Fixed It
Developed a dedicated module for logging extra and recurring jobs not tied to service tickets, with customizable recurrence like "Teams" (e.g., every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday).
Made all ticket-recorded time visible but locked for editing; engineers can only add or edit "miscellaneous" job timing, preserving integrity of ticket records.
Enabled on-click export to Excel, so finance gets exactly what they need, in the format they require, without any extra steps.
Integrated all recorded time; whether ticketed or ad-hoc into a unified dashboard for full transparency.
The Outcome
Engineers feedback that they enjoy smooth digital tracking; even for jobs that used to fall outside the system. Managers get complete visibility; finance receives standardized Excel exports without process changes.
Additional Features & Enhancements
Beyond the core workflow changes, several supporting features were redesigned to further improve the user experience.
Features
Comment Section
Enables clear job communication right within the dashboard, no more scattered messages with an added layer of transparency and ease of audit.
Account Profile Setting & Scheduler
Simplify personal info updates, preferences, and notification controls in one place (previously have to be done by the account managers instead). Scheduler also makes it easy for account and ticket managers to view and manage the engineer's task timelines and upcoming shifts.
These enhancements ensure that day-to-day tasks, communication, and scheduling are integrated seamlessly into the platform.
Design System
Stakeholder & User Testing
User Testing & Validation
To ensure the redesigned workflows truly solved engineers' pain points, I conducted targeted pre and post-surveys and user interviews throughout the project.
Rather than overwhelming users or reviewers with long survey lists, I centered my research around these core areas:
Ease of completing daily jobs
Editing and error correction
Workflow efficiency
Collaboration and communication
Technical reliability
Sample Research Questions Used
"How would you rate the overall effort needed to complete your most frequent daily job?"
"Which part(s) of your daily workflow feel most time-consuming or complicated?"
"Are icons/labels/instructions clear and consistent?"
"How could you describe the design? Intuitive or frustrating?"
"What was the most frustration you have ever experienced when using the app?"
"How has workflow efficiency changed since the redesign?"
Key Results
Survey scores and interviews showed major improvements in workflow clarity, task completion speed, and user confidence.
Metric
Clarity of Workflow (avg)
Completion Rate
Error Rate
Avg Completion Time
Satisfaction (avg)
Positive Feedback
Legacy Workflow
1.6/5
0%
High
NA
0/5
No positive feedback
Redesigned Workflow (Post-Test)
4.8/5
100%
Near Zero
4 - 6 min (depending on task details)
4.8/5
Frequent, specific
The Results
What Changed for Users?
Workflows became dramatically faster:
Engineers can now properly use the application without any process stopping them from moving to the next steps with navigation that "just make sense".
Confidence and satisfaction surged:
User ratings jumped from 1.6 to 4.8 out of 5, with engineers steadily accepting the new workflow and resistance dropped to nearly zero as app is now flexible to conform to their workflows.
Collaboration is smooth:
Built-in comments and notifications enable immediate updates and seamless handovers. No more chasing or miscommunication.
Onboarding is easy:
New engineers ramp up much faster, citing clear steps, and simplified reporting.
