Finmo: Modifying Application Details

Context and stakes: Why this mattered

Mortgage brokers work under extreme time pressure. In Finmo, modifying application details required repeated mode switching (view → edit → save) across dense forms. Individually, each step seemed reasonable, but collectively, they created cumulative friction in one of the product’s most critical workflows.

This friction showed up as:

1. Too many clicks
2. Excessive scrolling
3. Loss of confidence that changes were saved
   

The risk wasn’t just inefficiency, it was error, rework, and trust erosion in high-stakes financial tasks.

Ownership and action: What I took on

This project emerged from insights uncovered in Measuring Design Impact, but solving it required judgment, not just execution.

I took ownership of:

1. Framing the problem as a structural interaction issue, not a UI annoyance
2. Defining success as reduced cognitive overhead, not fewer pixels or cleaner screens
3. Ensuring solutions respected the constraints of a mature, production system
   

I wasn’t just designing a feature, I was deciding how users interact with data at scale.

Strategic framing: The real design problem

The real problem wasn’t that users had to click too much. It was this:

The interaction model did not match how expert users think when they are under time pressure.

Mode switching introduced unnecessary decision points:

1. “Am I editing or viewing?”
2. “Did this save?”
3. “Where am I in the form?”
   

Options considered: Tradeoffs

We explored three structural approaches:

1. Always-on edit mode (by removing view mode)
2. Breaking the application into separate pages
3. Reorganizing sections to mirror incumbent tools

Rather than guessing, we tested all 3 approaches.

Tradeoffs navigated:

1. Separate pages reduced density but increased navigation overhead
2. Reorganizing sections helped with familiarity but didn’t solve friction
3. Always-on edit mode reduced cognitive switching but required confidence in data safety

Additionally, we identified opportunities to make it clearer which section of the application users were in and to reduce unnecessary scrolling. These improvements included:

1. Adding section headings that remain fixed at the top of the screen as users progress through the application
2. Simplifying address fields by displaying them as text with an edit link, only showing input fields when changes are needed

I prioritized cognitive flow over familiarity, based on how brokers actually work.

Research and validation: Evidence over preference

Because static prototypes wouldn’t capture the complexity of interactions, we built functional prototypes and tested them with real users.

Results after testing with 5 brokers:

• 100% preferred always-on edit mode
• 100% valued persistent section headers for orientation
• Strong signal that reducing scrolling mattered as much as reducing clicks
• Strong support for simplifying address fields to reduce visual clutter unless edits were necessary

This reinforced a key principle:

Helping users feel oriented and confident outweighs gains in raw efficiency.

Outcomes and leverage: What changed

Immediate outcomes:

• Clear decision backed by user evidence
• High-confidence direction shared across PM, Design, Engineering, and leadership
• Alignment on how to solve similar problems in the future

Structural impact:

This work established:

• A precedent for continuous interaction in expert-driven workflows
• A repeatable pattern for reducing cognitive load without fragmenting structure

Reflection

This project reinforced how small interaction decisions can have outsized impact in complex systems.

My takeaway:

• Systems should handle state management so users can focus on their work
• In high-stakes workflows, structural clarity matters more than visual polish