Supplier Portal Sourcing Experience Optimization
Solved low adoption and compliance risks by pivoting to a transparent, email-first workflow with visualized timelines.
Role&Scope
Product direction + cross-surface execution
I owed problem framing, research synthesis, and end-to-end design across Email + Web. I led a strategy pivot (dashboard-first → email-first) and shipped a trust system by aligning Buyer, Compliance, and Engineering.
I used AI-assisted rapid prototyping to pressure-test assumptions early and de-risk the pivot before committing engineering time.
Background
Why sourcing became a compliance risk, not just a UX issue
Sourcing is a high-stakes procurement workflow with strict deadlines, documentation, and audit requirements.
However, most supplier actions happened in offline email threads, making decision trails hard to trace and increasing compliance risk. This project aimed to move work back into the portal by rebuilding trust in system communications and making progress transparent.
The core workflow of sourcing
Challenge
94% of activity lived in an unauditable "email black box"
Although we had a supplier portal, most sourcing activities happened in offline emails, making progress hard to track and decisions difficult to audit.
What was broken:
- Buyers didn't trust system notifications → manual follow-up emails became the norm
- Suppliers missed critical requirements → got blocked by confusing steps or dense legal content
- Compliance lacked consistent checkpoints → consent and traceability were fragile
Design goal
Rebuild trust and auditability by making the portal the source of truth—without adding steps to suppliers' core tasks.
Design Process
1. De-risk a dashboard-first direction before committing engineering time
We initially explored an industry-standard pattern: a "Task Center" dashboard to improve task discoverability. However, dashboard changes were expensive and cross-module, with unclear ROI.
Market leaders: a centralized "To-Do Center" on the dashboard
To avoid a high-cost build based on assumptions, I used AI-assisted prototyping and stakeholder walkthroughs to pressure-test the hypothesis early and clarify what would actually shift behavior.
Use GPT to generate prototype
2. Aha moment: Stop fixing navigation—fix the entry point
Almost 70% of suppliers hadn't registered in the portal before they were shortlisted/awarded, so they couldn't start from the portal homepage. For them, email deep-links + the detail page was the real entry flow.
This shifted our strategy from "improve portal navigation" to "rebuild trust at the entry point" — treating the detail page as the supplier's homepage.
3. Synthesize research into decision criteria (not just findings)
Three root causes became our decision anchors:
- System emails weren't actionable at first glance — critical updates (deadlines, required steps, changes) were buried, so suppliers missed intent and buyers stopped trusting notifications.
- The Sourcing Detail Page didn't communicate "where we are / what's next" — unclear separation between requirements vs legal content and low process transparency pushed buyers to go offline.
- Buyers needed early intent signals (Participate) — without a clear participation commitment, they couldn't gauge bidding pool health and had to manually chase suppliers.
Design Principle: Make the next action obvious, make progress visible, and make compliance enforceable — without increasing supplier effort.
Solution
1. Trustworthy notifications — Email as a first-class product surface
I redesigned system emails to function as a reliable entry point, not a passive alert:
- surfaced what matters (deadline, key changes, required action)
- reduced cognitive load with predictable structure
- drove confidence so buyers stop sending manual follow-ups
Why it matters: if the first touchpoint is untrusted, work will keep leaking into offline threads.
Built for Scale: I delivered a standardized email component. This allows other internal procurement teams (like TikTok and Auto business lines) to reuse the templates, ensuring a unified brand voice while reducing design debt.
Email Template
2. A stage model that makes progress auditable
On the detail page, I introduced:
- A stage-based timeline that acts as the backbone of the workflow. Stage clarity aligned with compliance on what can be transparently shown
- Early visibility of participation signals to reduce buyer uncertainty
- One primary action per stage to reduce confusion
Why it matters: progress becomes legible and traceable, which is essential for enterprise trust.
3. Compliance enforcement at the moment of commitment
To balance usability and risk mitigation, I separated "read once" compliance content from "read every time" task content:
- kept requirements scannable and action-oriented
- moved long legal content out of the main task path
- enforced explicit consent via a checkbox gate right before submission
Why it matters: compliance is satisfied without derailing the core task flow.
Impact
Design-led solution that improved adoption and earned strong user feedback
- High satisfaction in usability validation (buyer-facing results).
- Visual appeal: 4.8/5
- Willingness to promote to suppliers: 4.8/5
- Perceived improvement vs. legacy: 4.7/5
- "Suppliers can easily understand the new flow": 4.7/5
- Strong results after phased rollout. In the GGP department's Q4 pilot, online sourcing adoption increased from 3.9% → 19.92% (vs. 15% target).
- Recognized internally. The design-driven proposal was positively received by the product team and became the direction for rollout.
Thoughts
The Designer as an Orchestrator Navigating Ambiguity
Looking back at this project, the interface might look simple—often just standard components—but the decision-making behind it is incredibly complex.
At the start, the path forward was unclear. I stepped beyond the traditional design role to act as a Product Strategist, bridging the gap between Buyers, Suppliers, Legal, and Engineering.
The Balancing Act
My core responsibility was to find the "Sweet Spot" amidst conflicting forces:
- User Experience vs. Strict Compliance: I ensured that mandatory legal checks (like the checkbox) were implemented without destroying the usability flow.
- Design Value vs. Dev Cost: I worked closely with R&D to weigh feature impact against engineering effort, ensuring we delivered a high-quality solution that was technically feasible and cost-effective.
@ 2026 Claire Han