Product design
Senior product design, across UX and UI, for teams where design is decided by opinion: no shared criterion for judging a proposal, no system holding the interface together, and accessibility handled in bursts. We bring a testable way to make design decisions, and design systems that hold up after we leave.
The problem this solves
Several teams change the same interface in parallel. Each change looks reasonable on its own, but there is no shared way to judge whether it makes the product better or worse, so design reviews land in opinions and the loudest taste wins. Over time the consequences accumulate: trained users’ workflows break, the interface drifts apart screen by screen, and nobody can answer whether last sprint’s release actually helped the people who use the product all day.
Accessibility usually sits in the same pile. It gets handled as an occasional review round instead of a working practice, which means the debt grows between rounds. Since June 2025 the European Accessibility Act makes this a compliance question in the EU.
What we actually do
- Put a testable criterion behind design decisions. Every significant design choice gets framed as an assumption with a concrete behavioural goal, so after release the team has something to check against.
- Build the design system that stops the re-deciding. Where several teams or brands share one product, we build the shared component system and design language, so a new screen doesn’t need a new debate, or a new sign-off round.
- Make accessibility an ongoing track. WCAG requirements get integrated into the everyday design work rather than audited after the fact, because review rounds after the fact suit neither a product team’s pace nor its workflows.
What you leave with
- A shared, testable criterion for judging design proposals.
- A component system and design language that new work builds on instead of around.
- Accessibility handled continuously, with WCAG as the working benchmark.
Who it’s for, format, and duration
This is for a Head of Product or CEO at a product company where UX/UI capacity exists but design decisions don’t hold: reviews run on taste, the interface is drifting, or an upcoming accessibility requirement has made the debt visible. We are a product-growth consultancy: the design work is judged by what it changes for users and the business, and a senior designer embeds directly in your team.
The format is one senior product designer embedded with your teams. Engagements on record run from a few months to nearly three years (Bannerflow), scaling with how many teams share the interface.
One honest note on scope: we build the criterion and the system together with your team; the day-to-day design calls stay yours, made with a way to check them.
Book a call
If your design reviews land in opinions and you want decisions the team can check against reality, email hello@scilla.studio and we’ll book 20 minutes to see whether your needs and our skills are a match.
Talk to Joni about your situation
Take 20 minutes. We'll talk through what's going on and whether this is the right match. No sales pitch.
Book 20 min with Joni →More client proof
- Bannerflow Nearly three years of design reviews moved from taste to testable behavioural goals, with WCAG 2.2 ongoing. Read the case →
- Soundtrap Two audiences pulling in opposite directions on one interface, diagnosed through fast two-week test cycles instead of one shared compromise design. Read the case →
- Öresundskraft One shared design system gave three energy companies a common language and ended the sign-off rounds. Read the case →
- Teemyco Walking the product as a new user showed the barrier was conceptual, so onboarding was rebuilt to show value first. Read the case →