One working system for eighteen pharmaceutical brands

Put the words in the state where they appear

CarePath flows combined interaction requirements with brand copy, legal language, and FDA review. A field or message could not be treated as neutral scaffolding while its required words waited for a later pass. The team needed to review the copy in the state and layout where a person would encounter it.

I led UX at IBM and managed two designers through that review cycle. The design team mapped forms, authentication, messages, and claims as explicit screen states so the interaction, responsive layout, and required copy could be reviewed together.

Eighteen brands did not need eighteen interaction models

The brands did not need unrelated interaction models. They did need room for their own names, visual treatments, content, and program rules. A shared Figma system carried the common form and authentication patterns while each brand kept its differences visible to reviewers.

Compare form behavior in one sheet

A default screen was not enough

Account access, form validation, messages, and claims changed after a person acted or the system responded. Desktop and mobile layouts also had to preserve the same status and next action.

I led the review work, and the design team used the system sheets to place those variants beside one another. Reviewers could inspect the state, copy, action, and responsive treatment together rather than infer behavior from one polished frame.

See the states side by side

What the surviving record establishes

Surviving records describe more than 2,000 desktop and mobile screens as client- and FDA-approved. They do not define how variants or revisions were counted.

Follow an approved claims workspace