Ideation Workshop & Design Rollout

The Workshop for Product Ideation was conceptualized in September 2024 and implemented in October 2024. It was a request from the Product team with the goal of gathering new ideas for the product from inside the company, with all teams involved. This was the first ideation workshop organized by the company and the product team.

All the planning was organized in a schedule spreadsheet — from the first strategy meeting in September to the workshop day and feedback collection — as shown in the image below:

I decided to use Structured Brainstorm for the workshop for a few reasons:

• ✦Generates a high volume of ideas in a short time
• ✦Cross-team participants had uneven product knowledge and customer exposure — structure kept contributions balanced
• ✦The group mixed vocal and quieter personalities; structure gave everyone equal airtime and importance
• ✦Fun and engaging way to generate ideas

For the Structured Brainstorm, I followed the 10×10 format. References used:

• ✦Workshopper Website — The Ultimate 10 Minute Brainstorming
• ✦Figma template by Juarez Filho

The statement is an important part of the workshop because it is the topic at the center of the discussions. Following the 10×10 Brainstorm technique, we came up with the following statement:

We decided to use FigJam since it was an already known tool for most of the people on the team.

By the end of the workshop, we had gathered 57 new ideas. We also voted for the most promising ones (what would bring more value to the product according to the team members).

After the workshop, I sent a survey so the team could evaluate the workshop and suggest improvements. 15 people participated in the workshop and we had 10 responses to the survey.

• “Send the Figma link the night before or prior to the meeting so we spend more time with ideation”
• “Maybe assign someone responsible for grouping, that stage seemed to be pretty chaotic”
• “Fun workshop! Total vote counter per person would be helpful. Rules on which stamps to use (e.g. no question marks as votes) should be established too.”
• “Thanks for facilitating Jessica! This was awesome.”

• ✦Difficulties with FigJam: although most people use Figma tools, we had hiccups with access to the file. The solution was adjusting permissions and teaching some people to use FigJam while the group was in the icebreaker.
• ✦Time management: for most of the topics, I was able to keep good track of time, but I forgot to consider a few things, and because of that, we had almost half an hour left.
  • Two of the most sharing people from the sales team couldn't make it to the workshop
  • I consider too much time for open questions
  • Could've adjusted the time and added more minutes for the brainstorming and voting session
  • Could've prepared other activities and discussions in case there was time left
• ✦Grouping is hard: this part was noticeably hard and even showed up in survey comments. I'll change the dynamic for the next workshops.
• ✦Vote counter: every team member had 10 voting stamps, but at some point people got lost counting because we had no counter. Check a FigJam plug-in for that, or separate votes per person.
• ✦Some ideas surfaced during the session were too broad to act on and weren't challenged in real time. Next time, I'd insist more on clarifications before voting, so vague ideas get sharpened instead of just counted.

In the workshop, the team helped group the ideas by topic, and then the goal was to group them by similarity: what the ideas had in common, and how or if they could be implemented.

• New feature
• Improvement
• Documentation and onboarding
• Graphs and heatmaps
• New technology
• Users usage

After having the categories, we could understand which ideas were more valuable in each category.

The 57 ideas were consolidated and handed off to Product leadership for prioritization based on business impact and resourcing. Several of the prioritized ideas moved into design and were shipped over time. Of the ideas prioritized, I designed the following:

Icons and inline tooltips across configuration and reporting screens, clarifying complex fields, system states and validation messages in plain language to reduce friction. Content was researched and written by me and the PM, combining UX writing with product expertise to make dense data understandable at a glance.

A clone action built directly into the data source list, letting users duplicate an existing configuration into a pre-filled new entry instead of rebuilding complex fields from scratch. This addressed a recurring complaint that configuring a new data source took too long. A confirmation step, written in plain language, sets clear expectations before the action is taken.

A system of notification templates alerting customers to significant changes on their site. Templates range from severity-coded violation reports to before/after change-tracking summaries, each using visual encoding suited to the type of data (color-coded status vs. state comparison).

An interactive tree visualization tracing how personal data flows through the platform: from data type (e.g. email, password) to the pages where it's collected, down to the scripts and vendors with access to it. Selecting a node opens a contextual panel showing exactly who can read or transfer that data — with direct links into the Scripts and Vendors reports, turning a previously isolated set of reports into one connected investigation flow.

I designed the initial concept and interaction model for two workshop-driven ideas: an overall site health report and a Lighthouse-style security score. Both became the foundation of a browser extension that's live today, rated 5.0 stars with 5000+ active users.

Ideas from the session also shaped work outside of design: engineering built on the security-scanning concept independently, and marketing later addressed the documentation and support needs identified — publishing new help content and adding a chatbot to the site and platform.