Industry
Headquarters
Baltimore, MD
Founded
2010
Company Size
Key Markets
1M+ users globally
Growth Stage
ARR $8M by 2023
Website
Use case
Timeline planning, task dependencies, scheduling
Highlights
Reduced confusion in timeline editing
Fewer support tickets tied to task movement
Increased user confidence when adjusting schedules
Clearer mental model of task relationships
Overview
TeamGantt’s core value is visual planning. Users expect direct manipulation: drag a task, see it move.
The system supported dependencies between tasks. When one moved, others adjusted automatically.
The behavior was correct. The experience was not. Users thought the product was broken.
Understanding the Problem
The issue was not functionality — it was clarity. Users were making a simple action and getting a complex result.
Dependencies were not visually obvious
Task relationships were hidden until triggered
Dragging a task caused unexpected downstream movement
No clear feedback explaining why changes happened
The system was behaving correctly. The user’s mental model was not aligned with it.
Strategic approach
The goal was predictability. Users should understand what will happen before they act.
Making system behavior visible
The timeline needed to communicate relationships, not hide them.
Dependencies were redesigned to be more visually explicit in the timeline. Connections between tasks became easier to see and interpret at a glance.
Interaction feedback was introduced during drag actions. When a task movement affected others, the system showed it clearly and immediately.
The focus was not adding explanation. It was making the system legible through interaction.
Principle: If a system changes multiple things, users need to see the system, not guess at it.
Key Initiatives
Dependency visibility redesign
Users did not understand how tasks were connected.
What I did
Improved visual representation of dependencies in the timeline
Clarified how relationships appeared during planning
Reduced ambiguity in how tasks linked together
What changed
Users could see relationships before interacting
The system felt more transparent
Less surprise during edits
Key Initiatives
Interaction feedback during drag
Dragging a task triggered changes users did not expect.
What I did
Added real-time feedback when task movement affected others
Made downstream changes visible during the interaction
Reinforced cause and effect through motion and state changes
What changed
Users understood impact before completing the action
Confidence increased
Fewer mistakes during schedule edits
Additional workstreams
Simplified visual noise in the timeline
Reduced ambiguity in task positioning
Aligned interaction behavior with user expectations
Reinforced system logic through consistent feedback patterns
Cross-Functional Collaboration
Partnered with product and engineering to validate behavior changes against real usage patterns. Support tickets and user feedback guided prioritization.
Changes were scoped to improve clarity without adding system complexity.
Financial Impact & Business Enablement
This work fixed a trust problem. The system was doing the right thing — users did not believe it.
By making behavior visible and predictable, the product became easier to trust and easier to use.
Reduced support volume tied to timeline confusion
Lower friction in core planning workflows
Improved efficiency in schedule editing
Increased retention through better usability
Takeaway
Users do not need more capability. They need to understand what the system will do.
Predictability is the product.
Role
Head of Product Design and Design Systems
Led interaction design and workflow clarity efforts. Identified root cause through user feedback, redesigned dependency visibility, and partnered with product and engineering to make system behavior understandable and predictable.
Related Case Studies
Reducing onboarding friction by restructuring how users reach first value.
Making dependency behavior predictable in a visual planning system.
Scaling a product with limited design resources by building systems, not screens.
Lowering early drop off by restructuring how users reach first value.
Keep the product focused on the planning model, not expanding features.
Making product decisions that preserve control and predictability.
Designing scheduling behavior that feels powerful without becoming unpredictable.
Using direct observation to guide product decisions when analytics are incomplete.
Turning design from a service into a system tied to delivery outcomes.
Driving adoption and executive buy-in through phased, measurable impact.
Turning design into a decision driver by making its impact visible.
Turning fragmented research into a system that guides product decisions.