UX Research · Financial Regulation
Modernizing a financial regulatory reporting platform used by 3,000+ broker-dealer firms to ensure secure and compliant U.S. securities markets.
A complex regulatory ecosystem with real compliance stakes for thousands of financial firms.
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority oversees 3,400+ broker-dealer firms and 600,000+ registered representatives to protect U.S. market integrity. FINRA enforces compliance and safeguards investors across the financial system.
FINRA's electronic platform for standardized financial reporting (the FOCUS Report — Electronic Financial and Operational Combined Uniform Single Report). Firms submit required financial and operational data across 1,500+ fields in complex, multi-step filings. Errors introduce direct regulatory risk and can trigger FINRA investigation.
To understand the challenge, I mapped the actual filing workflow — and what users were doing outside the system.
Users navigated fragmented tools and static forms to complete complex regulatory filings — with no system support for accuracy or collaboration.
Users had to know how to file with no contextual help or inline instructions
The complete filing workflow spanned multiple disconnected tools and manual steps
Accuracy checks happened entirely outside the system, compounding error risk
Problem Statement: Firms needed to complete complex regulatory filings in a system designed for submission — not for the act of filing itself — forcing manual workarounds, duplicated efforts, costly errors, and compliance risk. The system captured data but did not support how users ensured it was correct, creating a dangerous gap between submission and data confidence.
Legal and policy mandates prohibited changing existing field labels — I introduced plain language guidance surgically, layered around copy I couldn't touch
Every legacy feature had to ship — including ones users never used. I used research evidence to move low-use features to the backlog, reducing cognitive load without violating the mandate
Field validation rules tied to regulatory data standards constrained UI patterns — every interaction decision had to account for compliance, not just usability
Transform the platform from a submission tool into a personalized filing guide — one that walks compliance teams through complexity step by step, the way TurboTax turned tax filing from a burden into something anyone can do with confidence.
Primary user access was blocked at the start. I built a research strategy that worked within that constraint — using what existed, filling what was missing, and using findings as leverage to open the door to real users.
Three interactive artifacts capture the full research picture — from user personas and journey mapping through empathy synthesis and survey quantification.
Voluntary firm survey · n=30 · CIT Capital Securities LLC · April–August 2019 · Triangulated with 15 usability sessions and post-launch call center data — meaningful signal in a regulated environment where primary user access required organizational buy-in to secure.
Every major design decision traces directly to a research finding. These aren't observations — they're the brief I designed from.
Users relied on spreadsheets, email, and offline coordination to complete filings the system was supposed to support. Four separate tools for one filing cycle.
Accuracy checks happened entirely outside the system — via email, phone calls, and spreadsheets. Every filing cycle compounded error risk and compliance exposure.
With 1,500+ input fields, users consistently matched data to the wrong line item — a cognitive load problem compounded by legally locked field labels I couldn't change.
Users felt isolated, accountable without system support, and most stressed at deadline pressure points — the moments the system abandoned them most completely.
These four findings reframed the design brief entirely — from "modernize the form" to "close the gap between submission and confidence." Every interaction pattern I chose traces back to one of these findings, including the constraints that shaped how I solved them.
I didn't design toward a visual aesthetic — I designed toward four specific research findings, within a set of regulatory constraints that shaped every interaction decision.
The north star was TurboTax — not as a visual reference, but as a workflow model. A guided, personalized experience that walks users through complexity step by step, building confidence at every stage rather than demanding expertise upfront. That model directly addressed what research told us: users weren't failing because they didn't know their data. They were failing because the system gave them no support in getting it right.
Insight 01 showed users were managing four tools for one filing cycle. I broke the workflow into logical sections with role-based entry points — one experience for Adam, Samantha, and Richard, not one form for everyone
Insight 02 showed accuracy checks happening entirely outside the system. I designed inline validation at point of entry plus a pre-submit error summary — catching errors where they happen, not after submission
Legal mandate prohibited changing field labels. I introduced plain language context through the floating label pattern — guidance that surfaces on focus without touching a single word of locked copy
Insight 04 showed users most burdened at deadlines. I designed deadline notifications, progress visibility, and contextual feedback directly into the platform — support exactly where and when users needed it most
The legacy dashboard was a static portal — no sense of progress, no task priority, no orientation. I redesigned it as a dynamic workspace that surfaces what matters and lets users act where the work is happening.
Research showed users managing four separate tools to complete one filing. I consolidated that into a single guided experience — chunked into logical sections, with role-based entry points tailored to how Adam, Samantha, and Richard each work.
The floating label pattern was my most precise design decision on this project. With 1,500+ input fields and legally locked labels I couldn't change, users were consistently matching data to the wrong line item. The floating label solved this with two simultaneous affordances: it anchors the line item number as a persistent visual reference when a field is active, and it reveals plain language contextual guidance in the space above — without touching a single word of locked regulatory copy.
The design handoff included detailed pattern specification documentation — covering interaction states, validation behaviors, and component usage guidelines — to ensure implementation fidelity across the engineering team.
Design → Developer Handoff · Pattern Specification DocumentationEarly ideation moved fast through whiteboarding and paper prototyping — keeping business analysts in the room for immediate alignment without the overhead of digital tools. This accelerated progression to high-fidelity interactive prototypes in Sketch and InVision, which became the primary vehicle for stakeholder review, leadership presentations, and usability testing with real firm users.
I joined a team 2 months behind on committed milestones with no established UX process. Before I could do research, I had to deliver — and then use that credibility to reshape how the team worked.
I came on board with the product team already 2 months past their committed delivery date for high-fidelity prototype concepts to technology and business leadership. I realigned all features, built the prototypes, and delivered. That move secured full product funding — and earned the product owner's trust in my judgment.
The product owner blocked access to primary firm users to avoid "burdening" them. I pushed back — proxy testing with regulatory coordinators alone wasn't sufficient. I led a 3-day Design Thinking workshop with Capital One's UX team, bringing in call centers, business leads, and engineers. 100% of secondary users preferred the new concepts. That outcome, combined with the trust I'd already built, opened the door to primary user usability testing and a voluntary firm survey.
Presented to technology leadership to validate technical feasibility, confirm implementation readiness, and secure approval to proceed with the proposed architecture and interaction patterns.
Presented to business leadership in New York to validate compliance constraints, align the experience to operational workflows, and secure the funding required for the full modernization effort.
Outcome: Full product funding secured. Approved for build and usability testing with real firm users — a first for a team that had not previously embedded UX in its process.
After alignment, I iterated with SMEs, partnered closely with engineering through build and QA, and validated the redesigned experience through usability testing with primary firm users.
"Most common issue with Amendments is putting in the wrong box."
— Small firm usability test participant · Confirmed need for guided data entry and inline validation"Edit checks sometimes do not point to the area of concern."
— Large firm usability test participant · Confirmed need for improved error navigation and contextual feedbackThe biggest design challenge on this project wasn't the interface — it was the system of constraints around it. Legally locked copy I couldn't change. A mandate to ship every legacy feature regardless of user need. SEC/FINRA data governance rules that constrained every validation pattern. I learned to design surgically: introducing plain language guidance around copy I couldn't touch, and using user research evidence to move unused legacy features to the backlog without violating the mandate.
Delivering first — when the team was behind and under pressure — was what gave me the standing to push for what the work actually needed. The 3-day Design Thinking workshop wasn't just a research method. It shifted the culture of a team that had never embedded UX in its process, and it moved a product owner from gatekeeping user access to championing it.
Leading alignment across technology and business leadership in a regulated environment — and translating design research into the language of business risk — is what secured the funding. That's the work I want to keep doing: not just designing the right thing, but building the organizational conditions that let the right thing ship.
Research that governs, not just informs. Open to creative and research leadership roles in DC.
create@mrouil.com