Lower fidelity, connecting the dots
Wireframes — and complete workflows, not just screens.
After the polished mockups landed flat, I stripped the visuals back to wireframes and mocked out full workflows — so brokers could feel how the product moved without the distraction of visual design.
To my surprise, lower fidelity brought more confusion, not less. The flows themselves were sound. The lesson was that static screens were the problem, regardless of the visual fidelity or degree of detail. This is what finally pushed me to build a real, working prototype.
The screens
Stripped back to structure.
The inbox, an email thread, and the assistant (“ready to help”) offering contextual actions, like summarize the chain, remind me later, look something up before replying. Visual design erased to keep attention on behavior.
Inbox, thread, and assistant — desktop and mobile.
Connecting the dots
Example workflow, end to end: reply to an email.
Rather than isolated frames, I mapped a complete task the way a broker would actually move through it: open the thread → let the assistant draft a reply → review and edit → send → confirm → file it away. I included branches for additional paths they may take from an open thread: “create a task,” “summarize the thread,” and “look something up first.” This is the interaction and information architecture, made walkable.
Reply-to-email workflow, mapped end to end.