Workflow evidence & usability audit
Trace one priority journey across observed behaviour, support evidence, product rules and technical constraints.
UI/UX design for B2B products in Bengaluru.
GreyBath helps Bengaluru product teams investigate one difficult user workflow, test clearer role and state behaviour, and document decisions for implementation.
Review the workflow scope
01 / What we build
Start with evidence. Resolve the operating detail.
Role, state & accessibility prototype
Test realistic permissions, responsive states, content and keyboard behaviour before detailed interface production.
System alignment & implementation review
Map accepted patterns to the current design system and review critical implementation details with engineering.
City context, honestly stated
A remote UX engagement for Bengaluru product teams.
We work remotely with Bengaluru teams through evidence reviews, prototype sessions and engineering check-ins; GreyBath does not claim a Bengaluru office.
Separate workflow evidence from opinion
Combine support records, analytics, interviews and product constraints before deciding which interaction should change.
Model roles and states together
Include permissions, empty states, errors and hand-offs so a clean happy path does not hide operational complexity.
Plan implementation, not only approval
Review components, content, accessibility and engineering constraints before treating a polished prototype as complete.
02 / Where it fits
Focused UX work for products already carrying real complexity.
This route is for an existing product or defined workflow with available evidence, owners and an implementation team. It is not broad product strategy.
Established B2B platforms
Clarify role-heavy onboarding, navigation, configuration and core tasks without assuming the whole product needs replacement.
Internal operations tools
Reduce avoidable errors in queues, forms, approvals and exception handling used by accountable teams.
Customer and partner portals
Make documents, status, requests and authorised self-service actions clearer across account types.
Teams consolidating design debt
Identify which inconsistent patterns create user or implementation cost before expanding a component library.
03 / How we work
Trace the problem, test the model, support implementation.
Frame the observed problem
Agree the user, workflow, evidence, constraints and decision the review must support.
Prototype realistic states
Test structure and interaction with real content, permissions, errors and agreed users.
Resolve and review implementation
Document the accepted direction, remaining risks and critical engineering details before build completion.
Set one useful investigation boundary.
The selected workflow, roles, evidence, research access, platforms, states and engineering involvement shape the proposal. Development remains separate unless named.
Discuss your projectEvidence & participant access
Analytics, support history, subject experts and suitable users available for diagnosis and testing.
Roles, states & platforms
Permissions, responsive contexts, errors, exceptions and adjacent product areas that affect the workflow.
Implementation support
Component mapping, content notes, accessibility detail, engineering reviews and responsibility after handover.
How is this different from the Bengaluru SaaS product-design page?
This draft starts with one existing workflow and its evidence. It does not promise broad product strategy, roadmap definition or a whole-product design programme.
Can you work within our existing design system?
Yes. We review current components, gaps and engineering constraints, then record whether each accepted pattern is reused, corrected or added.
Do you need access to users?
Direct access improves confidence. If it is unavailable, we state the limitation and use existing evidence and subject experts without presenting assumptions as research.
Does the review include accessibility?
The scope can include keyboard behaviour, focus, contrast, labels, content and responsive states. Formal conformance certification is not implied.
Can the interface support Kannada?
Kannada can be scoped when validated users need it. Your team supplies or approves terminology, and layouts are tested with the real script and content.
One workflow is creating repeated friction?