← Product Product · Case study

Consolidating pre-employment onboarding into one dashboard

12 weeks · Four-person intern team · Team lead and program lead

My roleI set the scope and pacing, coached the team, and made the UX and UI calls wherever options narrowed to one. Four interns ran the research and built the screens.

The final dashboard design: the self-onboarding stage breakdown, with candidates by step, time in stage and drop-off rate above the candidate table.
Final design · stage breakdown · Clickable prototype ↓
The problem

After a candidate accepted a contingent offer, their background check, tax-credit screening and onboarding progress lived in separate modules. No single view showed where anyone stood.

The constraint

12 weeks, a four-person intern team, and a brief with no defined scope. In phase 1 the dashboard could read from the other modules but not act in them.

The outcome

A dashboard design validated in 3 rounds of testing with 8 users, handed to product management with a product requirements document and specs. Product management took it to leadership and got the project prioritized.

The problem

New hires were tracked in four places and a spreadsheet

One candidate, two ways to find out where they stand
Before

Open each module, then update a spreadsheet

Applicant tracking
Offer signed
Background checks
Pending
Tax-credit screening
Eligible
Onboarding
Not started

Recruiters and background check staff kept personal spreadsheets to stitch the four answers together.

Places to check: 4 ·
After

One view of every stage

Contingent offer
Signed
Background check
Pending
Self-onboarding
Not started
Ready to start
Not yet
Owner visible Last action timestamped Overdue steps flagged
Places to check: 1
73
client requests for a consolidated pre-employment view
$7M
in revenue from the clients asking, rounded
23,703
employees at those clients
Source:

Mid-size and large clients felt the gap most, because several people touched each candidate and none of them could see what the others had done.

From the work · week 1The team's first whiteboard of the current and future state, with their own warning attached: "This is a giant assumption."
Client feedback requests

What clients wrote

From the feedback requests the team affinity-mapped
Four places to follow one candidate
“Applicant tracking is very segmented. For example, you go to your recruiter dashboard to look at job postings, then you go to ‘offered candidates’ to track offer letter progress, then you go to the background check dashboard for the background check process, then you go to the onboarding queue to track onboarding progress.”
Seven steps just to reach onboarding
  1. Applicant tracking
  2. Recruiter dashboard
  3. Offers widget
  4. Actions menu
  5. View all
  6. Find the candidate and click Hire
  7. Create new hire
Product brief

Pre-employment integration and onboarding tracker

Product brief · Employee management
Project description
Today our system lets users create applicants through applicant tracking, background checks and tax-credit screening. We should simplify the process to create one applicant record in our system that can be shared across all the modules before the candidate is hired. We need an intuitive place to track the progress of the pre-employment process for each candidate.
Background information
Information database structures. Probably heavy on the research side, formalizing the information architecture for this. Determining all the categories associated with this. Competitor examples?
Roadmap fit
There are currently 73 feedback requests from clients for this new feature, totaling about $7 million in revenue and 23,703 employees.
Blockers or risks
Depends on a related project to consolidate the onboarding framework.
Additional info
Product champion: the product consultant for onboarding.
What product management asked of the team
  • Establish a solid UX foundation for the module: user personas, needs and so on.
  • Based on user findings, propose analytical widgets and action roll-ups for the dashboard redesign.
  • Use existing rough wireframes as a springboard.
  • Propose value-add experiences for future projects that integrate the whole applicant onboarding experience.
Team whiteboard · week 1
The team's first current-state and future-state whiteboard.
Leadership · The setup

The brief named a dashboard and left the rest open

I led a four-person intern team on this project while running the company's design internship program, two teams of four that summer, alongside my design operations work. The program took on product work that neither product management nor design had the capacity to prioritize. I set the calendar and pacing for every team and reviewed every piece of work this team produced. Wherever the team had several options and settled on one, I guided or made that call.

12 weeks, summer 2025 · select a point to see the call
Points where I set direction
Week 2 plan and review · notes

Plan and review, week 2

Team meeting notes
Agenda
  • First draft of the research plan
  • Resources collected, preliminary questions asked, initial research on the product itself
  • Scheduling a walkthrough of the product with a recruiter
Feedback from KP
  • Only high-level market research.
  • Field research sounds solid. Try to include KP in the meetings with recruiters.
  • Preliminary interviews sound fine, but take note of the key tasks and objectives for the user flows. Those will be used for the more structured user interviews.
Team action items (selected)
  • Chart what we are doing, who we are doing it with, and when.
  • Log every meeting with recordings, notes and summaries.
  • Build an information architecture and an inputs and outputs diagram: all data being tracked, created, and where it goes.
  • Identify user personas.
  • Analyze and categorize user feedback into themes to define the scope.
  • Create a clear problem statement.
KP action items
  • Send a resource for an inputs and outputs diagram.
  • Share the assumption mapping workshop file.
Week 5 stakeholder alignment

What each stakeholder wanted, week 5

From the team's plan and review notes
StakeholderWhat they wanted
Senior designer, mentorValidate assumptions and identify the right information to surface on the dashboard before getting any design feedback. Clarity on the purpose of the survey.
KP, team leadMove on assumptions and validate later.
Product champion, onboardingA dynamic dashboard that changes based on which of the three modules the client pays for.
Product champion, applicant trackingScope: one applicant record shared across applicant tracking, background checks and tax-credit screening before the candidate is hired.
Product champion, background checks and tax creditsUnsure. More focus on background checks and tax credits?
The intern teamRefined scope: track a candidate from contingent offer to just before the first day of work. Assume the client uses all three modules.
Research · Leadership

Three rules I set from research fixed the scope

Research ended with three rules the design had to follow, each one tracked to its source in the team's assumption log.

From research inputs to product rules
What the team gathered
40+ client feedback requests, reviewed from the product backlog
Interviews and shadowing with recruiters, background check and tax-credit staff
A user survey run with the research team
A competitive review of onboarding dashboards
Journey maps, general and by industry, and personas
How it was sorted

Affinity map

Feedback sorted into needs and pain points.

Assumption log

Every belief, who it came from, and whether it was confirmed, still open or abandoned.

The rules that came out
Rule 1

Data flows into the dashboard, not out

In phase 1 it reads from the other modules and takes no actions in them.

Rule 2

Every candidate shows who owns them

Who on the client's team is responsible for each candidate's progress.

Rule 3

Recent actions from every module appear in one place

Applicant tracking, background checks, tax credits and onboarding.

All three rules trace to my working sessions with the team.
What the research found
Pain points · share of the 40+ client feedback requests reviewed
Complicated workflowSeveral modules for a single task38%
Clarity and functionalityInconsistent experiences, unknown features36%
Data consistencyThe same tedious actions, repeated14%
CustomizationNeeds that differ by organization11%

10+ interviews validated all four.

External survey · 75 participants
43say incomplete or missing documents are their main concern when gathering documents
30say their biggest coordination challenge is the number of teams involved
30mainly worry about candidates’ low sense of urgency on required actions
“[I spend] at least an hour per candidate… 70% of my time in my ledger.”Talent acquisition operations specialist, interview
The team’s research readout, with methods, competitors and goals, is in the hand-off. See the research readout ↓
How I coached the team through every gap
01 · The gap

The team hits a problem it can't answer yet

02 · I ask

What actions could resolve it?

03 · I ask

What outcome do you expect from each?

04 · I ask

How do you know that outcome is useful?

Then

Split the useful actions across the team, in pairs or solo

And

Cut what isn't worth the time it costs

Next gap, same questions. The week 5 call on the timeline is one turn of this loop.
From the work · weeks 3 to 5The affinity map: more than 40 client feedback requests sorted into needs and pain points.
From the work · journey mapThe general new hire journey, from application to first day, one of several the team mapped, including versions by industry.
Assumption log · selected rows

Assumption log

The team's research board · selected rows
AssumptionSourceStatus
The dashboard will not let the user take any applicant tracking, background check or tax-credit actions. "Data only flows into onboarding, not out."Meeting notes from KPIn progress
The dashboard will show which of the client's employees is responsible for each candidate's progress.Meeting notes from KPIn progress
The dashboard will show recent actions on candidates from applicant tracking, background checks, tax credits and onboarding.Meeting notes from KP; client feedback requestsIn progress
The dashboard will show a candidate's progress from beginning to end.Meeting notes from KP; meeting with a designer mentorIn progress
Candidates appear on the dashboard only once they enter the onboarding queue as a pending hire.Confirmed by a product championIn progress
Clients want a consolidated dashboard to manage the entire applicant lifecycle.Client feedback requestsClosed
Market competitors already provide comprehensive dashboards to their customers.Competitor researchClosed
The dashboard is the main entry point to other parts of the system.Abandoned
Affinity map · weeks 3 to 5
Affinity map
New hire journey map · general
Journey map
Iterations · Leadership

Every feature narrowed from several versions to one

The team went wide before it narrowed, twice: sketches and a critique wall before the feature list, then mid-fidelity versions and testing before high fidelity. At each point where versions narrowed to one, I guided or made the call.

Wide, then narrow, twice
  1. Open brief
  2. WideSketches and a critique wallSome ideas cut
  3. My callFeature list
  4. WideMid-fidelity versions, testing and a review workshopSome ideas cut
  5. My callOne high-fidelity design

The candidate progress tracker shows how that narrowing worked. Try the early version, then the final one.

The progress tracker, early and final
Home / Onboarding
Onboarding dashboard
Candidate progress tracker
Candidates
Candidate
Job title
Stage
Assignee
Illustrative data.
From the work · critique wallPrinted lo-fi screens, grouped by concept, with feedback stuck straight onto them.
From the work · review workshopTracker sketches from the workshop before high fidelity, with the team's notes: "Datafields being displayed need more planning" and "No toggle."
Critique wall
Critique wall
Tracker sketches · review workshop
Tracker sketches
Testing

Users and my own test pointed at the same weak spots

The team tested at every fidelity with the people who would use the dashboard, and I took one of the mid-fidelity sessions myself, playing a hiring manager.

3
rounds of moderated testing
11
sessions
8
users across four roles
4 / 5
average rating for the overall design at mid fidelity
Who tested, round by round
Round 1

Mid fidelity

RecruitersHiring managerSupervisors
Round 2

Mid fidelity, revised

Pre-employment specialistRecruiters
Round 3

High fidelity

RecruitersPre-employment specialistSupervisors
Plus my own session at mid fidelity, playing a hiring manager.
What testing found, and what changed
Found in testing
Raised by
In the final design
Testers clicked the stage counts, expecting to see the candidates in each stage.
Testers
Each count links to a breakdown page for its stage.
The My Tasks widget didn't read clearly, and the team rated it low value.
MeTesters
Removed.
A chart of candidates needing action showed how many, not who.
MeTesters
Dropped for stage pages whose tables list the candidates.
Testers asked for statuses that could be read at a glance.
Testers
Stage tags are color-coded.
Labels needed plainer words; one tester preferred “Assignee” to “Handler.”
Testers
“Assignee” throughout.
From the work · prioritizationThe team's value versus complexity chart after testing. My Tasks and the needs-action widget landed in the low-value half.
From the work · test synthesisSession notes sorted by feature, each group summed up before the next round.
Mid-fidelity session · KP as hiring manager

Test notes: KP, mid fidelity

Think-aloud with prompted tasks · the team's notes
General
  • Could identify the purpose of each major component, like the candidate progress tracker and the table.
  • Realized My Tasks refers to the tasks he needs to do, but thinks it could be structured differently.
  • Candidates Needs Action: feels he should be able to see the candidates who actually need action. Not intuitive.
Task 1 · Candidate profile drawer
  • First instinct is the search bar if the candidate isn't immediately visible. Assumes most people will click the candidate's name in the table to open the drawer.
Task 2 · Commenting
  • Went first to Send Reminder, then to Actions. Did not find the comments. Not intuitive. Looked for a progress indicator tied to the user's tasks.
Task 3 · Filter
  • After filtering, the number of results needs to stand out more.
Reflection
  • Some things need to be defined more, but the dashboard is on the right track.
Testing summaries · mid fidelity

What the team wrote after testing

Summaries from the testing affinity map, by feature
Progress tracker
  • Users expect that clicking on the number should take you to where you see the candidates in that stage.
Overall
  • General consensus that the overall design is intuitive. Average rating: 4. Navigation icons are intuitive. Formatting is similar to existing dashboards.
Candidates needing action
  • Step wording is ambiguous; each step needs to be clear. A quick summary may be useful to leaders. For high fidelity, rework the title, since recruiters were confused, and revamp the visual: the histogram communicates a different message than the widget intends.
Candidate table
  • Several specialists expected to move candidates through their workflow tasks from the candidate drawer, to avoid switching modules. For high fidelity, consider color-coded statuses, and make clear that "send reminder" goes to candidates, not coworkers.
Drawer and labels
  • Wording needs refining; for example, a user preferred "Assignee" over "Handler." The sort button should show its sort options.
Comments
  • Overall a well-received feature that is mainly intuitive. One user had difficulty locating it.
Notifications
  • Notifications are slightly hidden. They are tied to the candidates assigned to the user.
Value versus complexity
Value versus complexity chart
Testing affinity map
Testing affinity map
Final UI · User flows

One screen shows where every candidate stands

The final design opens on the progress tracker above one table of every candidate, built on the company's design system. Ownership and recent activity, two of the rules from research, show up in every row and every drawer.

The final design, annotated
Home / Onboarding
Onboarding dashboard
Candidate progress tracker
12Contingent offer
23Background check
17Self-onboarding
58Ready to start
Candidate onboarding management
All candidatesMy candidates
Search candidates
SortFilters+ Add new hire
Candidate
Job title
Stage
Assignee
Start date
Illustrative data. The full prototype runs these as tasks ↓
The candidate table, mapped from what users said they wanted to do
From the work · feature user flowThe team's full flow for the candidate table, with its goal, assumptions and every path from intent to outcome.
User flow · candidate table
User flow
Outcome

The team handed product management a design ready for its roadmap

In week 12 the team handed product management the documentation it would need to plan the build. The product manager said the findings and deliverables were what let them take the project to leadership and get it prioritized.

What the team handed off · select one to read a sample
Sample
After the hand-off

Development was never the goal of the program. The product manager planned to fold the dashboard into a larger onboarding initiative already on the roadmap, with its own build and release strategy.

The final prototype · each persona’s task, clickable

The hand-off included a clickable prototype for each persona’s task. All three run here, in a full window with a guide along the top.

Illustrative data. Esc or “Back to case study” returns here.
Illustrative data