Skip to content

( Independent Practice / 2026 )

Bluedash

Designed Version 1.0 end to end as sole designer, 190 or more screens across 12 modules: onboarding (25), projects (66), tasks (32), AI agents (17), Business Brain (10), dashboard (9), chats (8), integrations (8), settings (8), team (7)

My role
Freelance UI/UX Designer
Timeline
2026
Category
AI/ML SaaS / Business Operations / Marketing Technology
Status
New design, delivered

Tools Figma, FigJam, Align UI

Generated schematic standing in for imagery of Bluedash. It depicts nothing.
Generated schematic, not a screenshot of Bluedash.

Generated schematic, not a screenshot. Real imagery to follow.

( The account )

Context

Bluedash is an AI-native startup building business operations infrastructure for small and medium businesses, solopreneurs, coaches, and marketing teams. The product is a web-based SaaS workspace run by autonomous AI agents, a CMO, a Marketing Agent, a Design Agent, and a Content Agent, that plan campaigns, generate content, execute tasks, and report on performance. A conversational assistant called Sparky sits above them as the command layer: the user describes a goal in plain language and Sparky turns it into strategy, projects, tasks, published content, and metrics.

The category the product enters is unusual. Traditional project management tools assume a human does the work and the software tracks it. Bluedash inverts that: the software does the work and the human supervises it. No established interaction pattern covers that inversion at product scale, so almost every screen had to answer a question conventional SaaS never asks. What is the agent doing right now, how much of it was autonomous, where does a human still have to decide, and how do you intervene without breaking the run.

I joined to design Version 1.0 end to end. There was no prior product design, no existing information architecture, and no interface conventions to inherit beyond a general SaaS baseline.

The problem

Small and medium businesses face a compounding operational bottleneck. They have to strategise, plan, produce content, run campaigns, measure results, and coordinate people, all without the headcount or expertise to do any of it well. In practice this shows up as six connected failures:

1. **Fragmented tool chaos.** Owners run five to ten disconnected tools, schedulers, project trackers, analytics, content tools, CRMs, with no shared intelligence layer. Data sits in silos and nothing understands the whole business. 2. **Manual strategy bottleneck.** Building a campaign strategy needs market research, audience analysis, competitor intelligence, budget allocation, and content planning. Done manually it takes weeks, so resource-strapped teams do it badly or skip it. 3. **Execution paralysis.** Even with a strategy in hand, translating it into daily tasks, produced content, and a publishing schedule overwhelms small teams. Work slips and campaigns launch half finished. 4. **No intelligent oversight.** Conventional tools record what happened. None predict what should happen next, flag an engagement drop, or adjust course on live data. 5. **Knowledge loss.** Brand voice, audience, competitors, and operating rules live in the founder's head or scattered documents, so every new tool or hire starts from zero. 6. **The expertise gap.** An SMB cannot afford a CMO, a strategist, a content team, and an analyst. It needs one system that wears all of those hats without demanding expertise from the user.

The design problem underneath all six was narrower and harder: how do you give a non-expert user genuine control over a system that is doing expert work on their behalf, without either burying them in approvals or leaving them unable to see what the machine just decided?

What I did

The product replaces the fragmented toolchain with a single AI-native workspace, and the design organises it around a supervision model rather than a task-management model. Six pillars carry that:

**Conversational campaign creation.** The user states a goal to Sparky in plain language. A guided conversational flow collects objective, audience, and product detail, then returns a complete strategy with directional options, for example conservative against aggressive growth. One approval turns that into the execution framework: projects, phases, tasks, timelines, deliverables.

**An autonomous agent workforce.** Specialised agents run semi-autonomously, researching competitors, analysing audiences, producing Instagram Reels, drafting captions. They surface the decisions that matter and absorb the ones that do not. The user can take control, pause a run, or override an output at any point.

**Business Brain.** A dedicated module where the business teaches the system its brand identity, audience, competitors, operating rules, and reference documents. This persistent context is what makes every downstream output brand-specific rather than generically competent, and it removes the cold-start problem that makes most AI tools feel interchangeable.

**Real-time project and task management.** Every campaign generates a structured project with a strategy overview, phase breakdown, assignments, activity log, and results. Tasks move through To Do, In Progress, Review, and Complete with agents as assignees, and a live agent workspace shows work happening as it happens, for example an agent using Instagram, with take control, pause, and resume available throughout.

**An integrated intelligence dashboard.** Operational health at a glance: AI readiness, audience intelligence gaps, revenue attribution, total reach, project status, task completion, feeding back into agent accuracy over time.

**Integration and team layer.** A secure integration hub connects existing tools such as Google Ads, Shopify, and Instagram with granular permissions and encrypted handling, alongside role-based access, workspace invitations, and activity tracking.

The connective tissue across all six is the human-in-the-loop approval gate, placed at the points where a wrong autonomous decision would be expensive to unwind and omitted everywhere else.

Outcomes

  • Designed Version 1.0 end to end as sole designer, 190 or more screens across 12 modules: onboarding (25), projects (66), tasks (32), AI agents (17), Business Brain (10), dashboard (9), chats (8), integrations (8), settings (8), team (7)
  • Extended the Align UI design system with 855 or more custom components purpose-built for conversational AI, agent status, live execution overlays, and strategy approval, none of which the base system covered
  • Defined the product's information architecture and supervision model from scratch, with no prior product design to inherit
  • Established human-in-the-loop approval gates at the decision points where autonomy is expensive to reverse, keeping strategic control with the user while removing operational grunt work
  • Designed onboarding as progressive context building for Business Brain, so the first agent output is grounded in real business context rather than defaults

What I learned

Designing for autonomy is mostly designing for interruption. My instinct at the start was that the hard problems would be in what the agents produce. They were not. They were in the seams: what the user sees while work is running, where they can step in, and what happens to the run when they do. A system that produces excellent output but cannot be stopped mid-flight is one people supervise anxiously and eventually stop using, so the affordances around the work turned out to matter more than the work itself.

Context is a product surface, not configuration. Treating Business Brain as a real module rather than a settings page was the decision with the widest downstream effect. It changed onboarding from a form into a value demonstration, gave users a place to inspect and correct what the system believes about their business, and made the quality of every AI output traceable to something they could see and edit. I would now argue that any AI product with persistent context should give it a home the user visits, not a page they fill in once.

Approval gates need an architectural rule, not case-by-case judgement. Each individual confirmation step I considered was defensible on its own terms, and if I had decided them module by module the product would have accumulated dozens of them. Setting the supervision spectrum before designing any approval screen turned a recurring judgement call into a lookup, and it is the practice I would carry into any product where a machine acts on a user's behalf.

( Tags )

  • AI Product Design
  • Agentic AI
  • Conversational UI
  • AI Agents
  • SaaS
  • B2B SaaS
  • Web Application
  • Design Systems
  • Information Architecture
  • Interaction Design
  • Human-in-the-Loop Design
  • Marketing Technology
  • Business Operations
  • SMB Software
  • Onboarding Design
  • Dashboard Design
  • Project Management UX
  • Prototyping
  • Figma
  • Align UI
  • Freelance
  • Solo Engagement