Bringing design
and front-end into
one shared team.

Four value streams had their own product, design and engineering teams. As each developed its own patterns and conventions, shared design work became harder to maintain.

Patterns

Similar problems produced different components and interactions.

Quality

Expectations varied between streams.

Adoption

The design system existed, but its use was uneven.

The reorganization brought fewer, broader teams and changed reporting lines. The old staffing model no longer matched the work: scope was unclear, dependencies surfaced late and readiness meant different things to different people.

Coverage

Reassigned roles left gaps across active work.

Context

Designers and engineers lost a consistent route to alignment.

Readiness

Build cycles began with unresolved questions.

I proposed one team of four product designers and four front-end engineers, co-led with the Head of Front-End. CODA supported product teams according to priorities and the shaping pipeline rather than a fixed allocation.

Priorities

Assign support where it serves current company objectives.

Leadership

Bring design and front-end decisions into one conversation.

Allocation

Move capacity between product and system work as needs change.

I brought the design system team into CODA so its priorities could come from the products it supported. Ownership stayed central, while designers and engineers across contexts could contribute.

Ownership

Keep a clear place for system decisions.

Contribution

Let product work inform shared patterns.

Rotation

Give people a path between system and product work.

The company used a customized Shape Up rhythm: six weeks of focused work followed by a one-week cooldown. CODA connected shaping and delivery to that rhythm, with upcoming work prepared while the current cycle was being built.

Discover

Clarify upcoming scope and dependencies.

Deliver

Support the work committed to the current cycle.

Cooldown

Make room for system work, shaping and improvement.

I introduced six ceremonies to connect daily collaboration with the cycle. Each had a specific purpose, from surfacing blockers to reviewing readiness.

Coordinate

Daily standups and designer–engineer pairing.

Prepare

Mid-cycle shaping and the week-six readiness review.

Improve

Cooldown planning and recurring design system reviews.

We tracked six indicators across delivery and team health. The reported improvements were directional: clearer readiness, more balanced allocation and fewer rollovers, alongside stronger alignment, system activity and engagement.

Delivery

Clearer scope at the start of cycles and fewer projects rolling over.

Coordination

More balanced allocation and better alignment across teams.

Team health

More system contribution and adoption, with improved engagement.

CODA applied design practice to the organization itself. I had to understand the constraints, make tradeoffs visible and keep adjusting the model as the work changed.

Understand

Look at how people actually collaborate.

Prioritize

Make choices that fit capacity and product needs.

Adapt

Treat the operating model as something to keep improving.