01
Problem
Manual mapping made order imports difficult, error-prone and dependent on helpdesk support.
Case 01 · Order Template Creator
From manual mapping to reusable workflows
Turning repetitive order imports into a guided, reusable workflow.
I worked on a new order template creator for a complex B2B system in the pharma environment. The project addressed a recurring user problem: order files came from headquarters in different structures, while users had to manually map data every time. The new direction introduced reusable templates, file preview, assisted automapping and manual correction where needed helping users start with more confidence instead of configuring everything from scratch.
Case at a glance
02
Goal
Enable users to save mappings as templates and reuse them in future imports.
03
Solution
Reusable templates with assisted automapping, file preview and clear validation states.
My role
Users
Evidence
The challenge
The project was part of a network order import process in a B2B system used in the pharma environment. Users worked with files provided by headquarters, which could vary in format, column layout and data structure. In the previous process, users uploaded a file, selected columns, continued to pairing and saved the import. The flow was mostly based on manual mapping, but users did not have enough support to understand what the imported file actually looked like or whether the mapping was correct. The biggest problem was not only the mapping itself, but the lack of confidence. Users were not always sure if they understood the file structure, selected the right columns or whether an error would appear later in the process. This often led to mistakes, frustration and helpdesk support.
The problem was not about a one-time import. It was repetitive work performed across different files and networks. The solution had to support not only a single mapping flow, but also a way to reuse previously configured mappings. The challenge was not simply to create a template creator, but to design a process that would not push the full complexity of mapping onto the user. The initial concept was a good starting point for discussing the logic of the process, but after walking through the flow I noticed that part of the complexity could be transferred directly to the user. A more manual configuration approach could lead to too many decisions at the start, more clicks and a risk that the user would not be sure what to do next. The key question became: how can the system help the user start, instead of requiring them to configure everything from scratch?
As is → To be
AS IS
Old workflow
The original process relied heavily on manual mapping and required users to understand multiple relationships at once. Repetitive actions created unnecessary effort and made progress harder to follow.
Workflow
UploadManual mappingReviewRepeatRepeat
TO BE
New workflow
The redesigned workflow shifts repetitive work to the system and lets users focus on reviewing exceptions instead of starting from scratch. Progress becomes easier to understand while users stay in control where decisions matter.
Workflow
UploadAutomappingReview exceptionsSave template
Problem breakdown
User problem
Users had to manually map data without enough file preview or guidance.
Product problem
The process was repetitive, but the system did not make it easy to save and reuse mapping that had already been configured.
Design challenge
The solution had to combine automation with user control, support different file structures and clearly communicate errors.
My role & approach
I owned the project as the Senior Product Designer, from understanding requirements and analyzing the existing process to defining the workflow, designing the interface structure, preparing a prototype and running internal testing. My role was not only to design the UI, but to translate a complex set of requirements into a clearer interaction model: the system performs the first step, while the user makes decisions only where review or correction is needed.
AI-assisted prototyping
In the first stage, I used Claude to quickly explore flow variants and build an early prototype.
Requirements
✦ Variants
✦ Prototype
Validation
Iteration
Design process: from manual mapping to reusable templates
The main shift was turning one-time manual mapping into a repeatable workflow based on templates. Instead of asking users to assign file columns from scratch every time, the new solution allows them to save a mapping structure and reuse it in future imports. The template works as a starting point: the system can recognize the data and suggest mappings, while the user can still review and correct them manually. This way, automation does not remove control. It reduces the most repetitive part of the work and helps users understand what has already been recognized, what needs attention and what can be saved for reuse.
User flow
Key design decisions
Decision 1: Guided step-by-step workflow
I replaced the table-driven experience with a guided workflow to reduce cognitive load and make progress easier to follow.
Problem
The original flow relied heavily on tables and required users to understand multiple actions and relationships at once.
Decision
I translated the process into a guided workflow built around sequential steps and mapping cards.
Why it mattered
The goal was not to make the process more restrictive, but to reduce cognitive load and provide a clearer sense of progress.
The active step is clearly highlighted.
The view keeps mapping decisions close to the file context, reducing uncertainty during setup.
Decision 2: Automapping as the starting point
I proposed automapping as the starting point so users could begin with a system-generated proposal instead of an empty setup.
Problem
Starting from an empty configuration required many manual decisions upfront and made the process feel heavier than necessary.
Decision
I proposed automapping as the starting point, with manual editing only where the system did not have enough confidence.
Why it mattered
The system provides an initial proposal, reducing repetitive work while keeping users in control.
The system helps users start instead of asking them to configure everything from scratch.
Decision 3: Clear statuses and validation
I introduced a clear feedback system so users could quickly see what was mapped, what needed review and what blocked progress.
Problem
After automatic assignment, users needed a fast way to understand whether they could continue or if something required attention.
Decision
I introduced three levels of feedback: detected fields, optional fields requiring review and missing required fields.
Why it mattered
Users can immediately distinguish success, warning and blocking issues without interpreting system behaviour themselves.
Helping users understand what was detected, what needs review and what blocks progress
Decision 4: Safer shared-template actions
I added contextual warnings around shared-template actions to make consequences clearer before users confirm a change.
Problem
Templates could be used across teams, meaning that deleting or changing them could unintentionally affect other people.
Decision
Instead of a simple confirmation dialog, I introduced contextual warnings showing who would be affected and the impact of the action.
Why it mattered
The goal was not only to prevent mistakes, but to support more informed decisions around shared system elements.
The warning modal explains who will be affected by deleting or changing a shared template, helping users make a more informed decision.
Solution highlight: template management list
Beyond the creator itself, users needed a place to manage saved templates. The template list works as a control center: users can find a template, check its status, see assigned networks and perform key actions such as edit, preview or delete. The goal was to keep the view clear, but informative enough so users did not have to open every template to understand its scope.
Template library overview
Filters open in a side panel, so users can refine the list while keeping the template table in context.
Applied filters stay visible above the table, helping users understand why they see a specific subset of templates and quickly clear the criteria if needed.
Prototype testing and iterations
To validate the early direction, I prepared a quick interactive prototype and tested it with 5 internal participants familiar with the order import process, including helpdesk, PO and people from other departments. These were not tests with the full group of end users, but a qualitative validation with people who understand the process, the most common user problems and the operational context. The goal was to check whether participants understood the concept of reusable templates, whether automapping felt helpful and where the interface still needed stronger guidance before implementation.
The tests confirmed that the overall direction was understandable and valuable. Three areas stood out most strongly: interface clarity, automapping as a quick starting point and the ability to reuse templates as a meaningful time saver.
What worked well
“It is clear, clear and more organized than what we had before.”
R01
“It is one click, and if there is still an option to edit it, that is a very good solution.”
R03
“This is simply a game changer. It definitely saves time because I do not have to prepare the file manually.”
R02
What changed after testing
The tests were not only a confirmation of the direction. They helped me clarify where users needed more confidence, stronger guidance and clearer communication.
Users needed stronger guidance during the first mapping experience
Design response
I added a step-by-step structure, visible progress, first-use onboarding and contextual tooltips.
Why it mattered
The flow became easier to understand for new users without overloading the main workspace.
After automapping, users needed clearer information about what was detected, optional or blocking
Design response
I added statuses to clarify each field:
DetectedOptionalMissing · required
Why it mattered
Users can understand faster whether they can move forward or need to take action.
Edit actions were too hidden
Design response
I made edit and delete icons permanently visible next to the mapped field.
Why it mattered
Manual correction became easier to discover exactly where users need it.
Shared templates could be accidentally changed or deleted
Design response
I added a warning modal showing the impact on other users.
Why it mattered
This reduces the risk of unintended changes in a company-wide workflow.
Implementation awareness
My front-end background helped me think about the workflow not only as a sequence of screens, but as a system of states and dependencies.
Key considerations included:
- validation states
- incomplete mappings
- manual overrides
- reusable components
- scalable workflow logic
Outcome & reflection
The redesigned workflow created a clearer and more scalable foundation for future order template management. Internal validation suggested that the new direction reduced uncertainty and made the process easier to understand. The project also showed that reducing complexity was not always about removing steps. In some cases, guidance and visibility had a bigger impact than simplification itself.
← Back to all case studies