Repositioned Collekt.ai from a lightweight SaaS tool to an enterprise AI infrastructure, completed a full website redesign approved by stakeholders, and handed off to the dev team in 4 weeks.

Role: UX/UI Designer

Note: Worked closely with the client's vision; final implementation is handled by their internal front-end team.

The product operated at scale, but the website failed to communicate that maturity. This created a trust gap at the enterprise level. Banks couldn’t clearly assess operational depth, while investors struggled to understand the system’s defensibility and complexity.

I treated this as a positioning problem, not a visual redesign.

I built the information architecture from the ground up, defining structure, narrative flow, and content hierarchy. In parallel, I worked closely with the founder on messaging to ensure each section speaks clearly to its intended audience.

The experience was designed to serve two distinct groups simultaneously:

Banks, requiring trust, compliance, and clarity

Investors, evaluating scalability, defensibility, and technical depth

Instead of relying on standard SaaS or AI visuals, I established a strict visual direction: no dashboards, no stock imagery, no generic AI motifs. The system is communicated through abstract data flows, motion that reflects real-time orchestration, and restrained typography.

I developed the full visual language from scratch, including the design system, animation logic, and handoff documentation, ensuring precise implementation without ambiguity.

Every visual element was defined not only by how it looks, but by what it communicates about the system.

Animation and layout decisions were used to express:

system behavior

orchestration logic

real-time activity

Early concepts validated the narrative direction, but several iterations exposed inconsistencies in color and layout. These explorations were intentionally used to stress-test the system and refine it into a more cohesive and scalable solution.

Although the concept was validated early, clearly conveying the product’s value and ecosystem, several iterations missed the mark due to inconsistent color use and subpar layout choices. These explorations, though not selected, were crucial in stress-testing the visual system and informing a more unified final design.

The core issue was perception.

Despite being a complex AI-driven collections infrastructure, the product was perceived as a simple SaaS tool. This limited trust and made it difficult to communicate the platform’s depth, particularly its AI-human execution model and orchestration layer.

The goal was to shift that perception toward enterprise credibility, clarity, and readiness for scale.

Reframing the category Moving beyond SaaS conventions to communicate infrastructure-level thinking

Designing for dual audiences Balancing clarity for banks with strategic depth for investors

Avoiding generic signals Eliminating overused AI and SaaS visual patterns

Simplifying complexity Making a multi-layered system feel understandable and structured

Building from zero Creating a scalable visual and component system without legacy constraints

The redesign was approved by the founders and delivered within 4 weeks.

The final output included:

a 10-section narrative-driven website

a complete design system with 20+ reusable components

detailed animation specifications

developer-ready documentation

This enabled a faster internal rollout and reduced implementation ambiguity.

From a strategic perspective, the redesign:

clarified the product’s value at first glance

strengthened its positioning in investor conversations

established a clearer narrative for both banks and investors

To reinforce the shift from software to infrastructure, all standard SaaS visual conventions were removed.

The final system is built around:

abstract representations of data flow

motion as a core storytelling tool

a dual-layer narrative structure prioritizing enterprise trust while supporting investment evaluation

Given more time, I would validate the narrative through direct testing with bank and investor stakeholders. Specifically, to assess whether the “operating system” framing communicates clearly enough for compliance-focused decision-makers or requires more explicit support.