I lead product design through strategic uncertainty — turning complex constraints into clear vision.

I make my case with research and evidence, document my concerns, then commit to the chosen direction while continuing to advocate through my work. When leadership chose a Notion-like systems approach over my workflow-focused recommendation, I created a strong vision for it anyway — I didn't sabotage or disengage. I also made sure my concerns were on record. That experience reinforced the importance of making tradeoffs visible and continuing to contribute when the chosen direction differs from my recommendation.

I adapt the research approach to the problem. Jobs-to-be-done is one lens I use often, but I pair it with close attention to the key moments people have — or need to have — with a product or service. Those moments can reveal emotional and experiential needs that JTBD alone may miss. At BEN, I established a research practice spanning approximately 300 interviews, built a research database, and trained teams on research methods. For VisionType I, the work showed that creators and brands shared three core jobs — reaching audiences, creating content, and collaborating without friction. That reframing shifted us from "agency features vs. creator features" to a unified platform serving shared needs.

This is the reality of design leadership. At BEN, I created three major product visions as strategy evolved. Market changes (iOS 14.5 privacy shift), leadership changes, and acquisition dynamics all forced pivots. The skill isn't preventing change — it's maintaining forward momentum through it. Each vision built on research that remained valid. The direction changed; the understanding of users didn't. The ambitious rebuild made progress but was still short of broad-release readiness when investment priorities changed. We had to redirect effort toward near-term profitability; the original vision’s full business impact was never measured.

Design is about making decisions that give teams direction while leaving room for discovery. A good vision isn't comprehensive — it's clear enough that teams can make their own decisions without asking permission. I focus on the "why" and let talented people figure out the "how." This scales better than trying to specify everything.