Loading case study…
Loading case study…
01Case study
PETRONAS
Designing a connected enterprise experience that brings engineering data, visualisation, comparison, estimation, and daily workflows into one platform.
LiveADP is an internal enterprise platform that helps PETRONAS engineers work with oil and gas station and product data, station and engineering information, product pricing, location and transportation details, historical and current data, comparison, estimation, monitoring and task workflows.
02The Challenge
Before LiveADP, engineers relied on Excel spreadsheets and multiple platforms to access information, analyse data, perform estimations, monitor changes, and complete daily tasks.
Although spreadsheets provided access to data, the overall workflow required engineers to move between different information sources and systems.
The challenge was not simply to replace Excel with a more attractive dashboard. It was to rethink how engineers could access information, compare data, perform analysis, and complete tasks within a more connected experience.
Data was distributed across spreadsheets and systems.
Historical and current data required additional effort to compare.
Engineers needed better access to graphs, charts, and location-based information.
Information gathering and task submission could require multiple platforms.
The existing process involved unnecessary context switching.
Fragmented engineering workflow
Conceptual illustration of the previous way of working, not a research artefact.
Design questionHow might we simplify complex engineering workflows by bringing fragmented data, analysis, and task completion into one connected platform?
03UX Discovery
I was involved from the beginning of the project, participating in UX workshops, requirements gathering, and stakeholder interviews.
The discovery activities involved PETRONAS engineers who would use LiveADP, alongside business stakeholders and Product Owners.
These discussions helped the team understand the existing engineering workflows, information needs, operational challenges, and business requirements.
The findings and requirements informed the direction of the proposed enterprise experience.
What the discussions explored
My contributions
Participated in collaborative sessions to understand the existing process and discuss the proposed platform.
Helped gather and clarify requirements for the enterprise experience.
Participated in interviews involving engineers, business stakeholders, and Product Owners.
Contributed to understanding how engineers accessed information and completed their daily tasks.
Worked with the team to connect engineering needs and business requirements to the proposed design.
Conceptual summary of the discovery themes, no interview questions, quotes or participant numbers are published.
04Before vs After
Key design directionConsolidate related engineering information and task workflows into a unified interface.
Reducing fragmentation was a design objective. No time savings or productivity changes are claimed.
05UX Flows & Structure
I partially contributed to the UX flows that helped define how engineers would navigate the platform and complete key activities.
The design challenge involved organising multiple types of engineering information and workflows into an experience that remained understandable and usable.
My roleI contributed to selected UX flow activities as part of the wider project team; I didn’t own all UX flows independently.
Engineering platform
Capability 1 of 7
A connected overview of relevant information and platform activities.
Conceptual grouping of capabilities, not the platform’s actual information architecture or navigation.
06UI Design
I was responsible for the UI design across the LiveADP platform within the project scope, covering dashboards, data tables, visualisations, comparison interfaces, mapping, estimation, and task workflows.
The interface design used the existing PETRONAS Design System to maintain consistency in visual language, components, and interaction patterns.
This phase involved translating complex engineering requirements and workflows into structured interfaces.
My UI ownership
Interfaces bringing relevant information and platform activities into a connected overview.
Structured interfaces for reviewing engineering and product information.
Chart and graph interfaces for exploring and interpreting relevant data.
Interfaces supporting comparisons between historical and current information.
Mapping-related interfaces for exploring location-based engineering information.
Interfaces supporting estimation-related tasks.
Interfaces for completing and submitting relevant workflows within the platform.
Conceptual UI showcase
Concept 1 of 6
The starting point: rows and columns of values, basic filtering, and comparisons done by hand across sheets and other tools.
07Design QA
My involvement continued into development, where I performed Design QA.
I reviewed the implemented interface against the intended designs and supported the team in maintaining consistency between design and implementation.
Design QA focus
Conceptual process diagram. No defect counts or resolution figures are published.
08Outcome
LiveADP was developed and used by PETRONAS engineers.
The delivered platform brought engineering information, data visualisation, comparison, estimation, mapping, and task workflows into a more connected enterprise experience.
My contribution spanned early discovery, requirements gathering, stakeholder interviews, partial UX flow development, the platform UI design, and Design QA during development.
The platform brought related engineering information and workflows together.
The platform’s UI was designed using the existing PETRONAS Design System.
LiveADP was developed and used by its intended engineering audience.
These are confirmed delivery outcomes, not measured productivity, time, error or adoption figures.
09Reflection
LiveADP reinforced the importance of understanding users’ real working environments before designing enterprise interfaces.
Working with engineers, business stakeholders, and Product Owners helped connect operational needs with business requirements.
The project also strengthened my experience in translating complex information into structured interfaces, working within an established design system, and supporting implementation quality through Design QA.
It showed how product design can help make complex workflows more connected and understandable.