NEXT PROJECT — CIVIC ECOSYSTEM

AA DESIGN SYSTEM AUDIT

Listening to the product before documenting the system

Listening to the product before documenting the system

DESIGN SYSTEMS

An evidence-led audit of AA New Zealand’s live product, treating computed styles and interaction behaviour as a source of truth.

ROLE — Product Design, Systems Audit

DELIVERABLES — 7 documentation pages

TEAM — Solo

TEAM — Solo

FOCUS — Evidence, clarity, honest documentation

EVIDENCE TRAIL / 01

A live product tells you what a screenshot cannot

A live product tells you what a screenshot cannot

A live product tells you what a screenshot cannot

EVIDENCE REVIEWED

AA NZ product evidence / mobile + web

AA NZ product evidence / mobile + web


THE AUDIT_

The first-pass spec matched the conventions I expected to find. The real interface, recorded in motion, told a different story.

The first-pass spec matched the conventions I expected to find. The real interface, recorded in motion, told a different story.

01

A single screenshot suggested the mobile sub-links were Link Blue.

02

The screen recording showed they were black — and that three nested groups toggled independently.

03

Neither fact was visible until I watched the product behave.

04

04

04

The correction became part of the documentation, not something to erase.

THE QUESTION

How do you document a system honestly when the product keeps correcting your assumptions?

First pass

“This is probably consistent with the rest of the system.”

Observed behaviour

black sub-links
three independent toggles
live interaction states
recording over convention

The behaviour is visible. The underlying experience isn’t.

DOCUMENTATION METHOD

Proposed

An interpretation that still needs to be tested.

Confirmed

Observed in the live product or a recording.

The trail

Keep earlier reasoning
show what changed
tag each value
make certainty earned

What the audit made visible

Pattern 01

A single state is not a component’s whole story.

Documentation needs the behaviour, not just the appearance.

Pattern 02

The live product is a research participant.

Its computed styles and interactions can disagree with our assumptions.

Pattern 03

Accuracy improves when proposed values are visibly provisional.

Pattern 04

Correction is not failure. It is evidence of attention.

INTERPRETATION GAP

A designer expects

“The pattern will follow convention.”

The product shows

“Watch me before you describe me.”

The documentation records

“Here is what is confirmed, and what is still proposed.”

Listening begins when the evidence is allowed to revise the first interpretation.

MY DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

A designer is a listener before a problem-solver.

Predict. Clarify. Check the interpretation against what is actually there.

The audit made that discipline concrete. Instead of relying on familiar patterns, I checked the live interface — its computed styles, its states, and the behaviour revealed only when the product was in motion.

Seven pages, built from evidence

Foundation
Colour, type, spacing, and real visual tokens.

Each value is marked as confirmed or proposed, so the documentation says exactly what it knows.

Iconography
A shared visual language for recognisable actions.

The icon pages connect each symbol back to the live visual language instead of inventing a parallel one.

Buttons
States, hierarchy, and application across mobile and web.

Components document what changes on interaction — not just their resting appearance.

Navigation + stepper
Accordion behaviour, depth, and progress patterns.

The mobile navigation and stepper record real structure so future work can be precise.

DELIVERABLE / 02

Seven documentation pages across mobile and web

Seven documentation pages across mobile and web

Seven documentation pages across mobile and web


foundations / icons / buttons / accordion nav / stepper

foundations / icons / buttons / accordion nav / stepper

WHAT CHANGED MY THINKING?

Honesty about capacity and evidence turned out to be the same practice.

01

01 — When illness interrupted the project, I learned that naming capacity clearly is not separate from the work. It is the work: check what is actually true.

02

02

02 — I kept the earlier spec rather than hiding it. The correction became part of the trail, showing how the documentation earned its confidence.

03

03 — Design systems and self-care asked for the same thing: stop performing certainty, listen closely, and let the correction stand.

BACK TO WORK

TAKE FLIGHT

HM

Hans Melbert

HANS MELBERT CAOILE

CONTACT

CONTACT

STATUS

AVAILABLE

REMOTE

SHARDS OF SHARED MEMORIES

Leave a note for the archive. Submitted memories become pixel shards visitors can open and read.

all rights reserved, hans melbert caoile ©2026