SKETCH 01 · LEAD TIME
Wrong altitude.
Per-batch granularity drowned the signal. SME annotation in red: “Knowing individual batches’ time doesn’t help.” Spec: cut the per-batch view, ship a phase-level rollup.
+ 01 / Intro
AlnylamSSOTLead Time Dashboard · sketch v1 · day-one war room
SME annotation in red — “Knowing individual batches’ time doesn’t help.”
Sketches as catalysts, not artifacts. The wrong one made the right one obvious.
- Role
- Senior IC
- Timeline
- 8 weeks fixed → engagement expanded
- Impact
- Shipped · +690% YoY client revenue · 4 follow-on engagements
+ The constraint
02
Two months. Fixed budget.
A platform the client was about to bet a lot on.
Alnylam’s SSOT consolidates program data scattered across R&D, Clinical, and Launch into one platform. Discovery couldn’t run long. Stakeholder groups were using the same words (“milestone,” “phase”) to mean different things, and a workshop or two wasn’t going to surface it. Traditional UX rhythm would have caught the misalignment three weeks before launch — too late.
THE FOUR CONSTRAINTS THAT RULED OUT TRADITIONAL PROCESS
8 wksFixed timeline · zero buffer · no recoverable slip room
FixedBudget locked at contract · scope creep forbidden
3+Stakeholder groups · overlapping vocab, different mental models
HighStakes · clinical-trial timelines downstream of the platform
The choice wasn’t between fast and slow. It was between what surfaces misalignment fastest. Discovery interviews surface stated preferences. Workshops surface group consensus. Neither surfaces what a stakeholder actually believes about a specific data view until they see one and react to it. So the method had to start at the artifact.
+ In practice
03
The annotations
ARE the spec.
Four sketches from the eight weeks. Each one carries the SME reaction it provoked, still on the page. The case study doesn’t have to describe the method — it’s drawn in the margins.
SKETCH 02 · INVENTORY LEVEL
Wrong scope.
A Storage Location filter was drawn in. Pink-box reaction: “We might not need.” Spec: cut the dropdown, simplify the chrome.
SKETCH 03 · OPTION 2
Wrong emphasis.
Equal-weight stacked bars buried urgent batches. Green sticky: “Focusing expiring RM and highlight them.” Spec: dim non-expiring, emphasize expiring.
SKETCH 04 · SANKEY EXPLORATIONS
The sketch is the conversation.
Three Sankey options on one canvas, sticky-notes everywhere. No deck. No write-up. Spec: the meeting is the artifact.
↑ Annotation = spec. No translation step. ↑
Every sketch went out at end-of-day with annotations on it. Every morning started with the next version of the same sketch.
+ The outcome
04
Eight weeks in.
The engagement expanded.
The hard constraint wasn’t a ceiling on the project — it was a floor for trust. Velocity at fixed scope was the proof. The expansion came not from a single deliverable, but from a cadence the client decided to keep buying.
RECEIPT — WHAT THE ENGAGEMENT RETURNED
- Client revenue growth YoY
- 690% Client revenue growth YoY
- Highest growth on this client in 5 yrs
- 5 yrs Highest growth on this client in 5 yrs
- Additional engagements signed
- 4 Additional engagements signed
- More pharma initiatives followed
- 3 More pharma initiatives followed
A proof-of-concept the client kept buying.
- Led directly to 4 additional engagements to scale digital transformation
- Positioned the SSOT as a proof-of-concept for broader platformization
- Client gained confidence in what could be achieved within severe limitations
Cadence-driven trust → top-line growth.
- Revenue from the client grew 690% compared to the previous year
- Marked the highest growth in 5 years across this account
- Trust built on velocity, not deliverable polish
Sector-specific demand established.
- Became a trusted design lead in Life Sciences and Healthcare initiatives
- Pulled into 3 more pharma initiatives right after this engagement
- Method generalized into a Life-Sciences-track playbook
+ Reflection
05
Where this method
earns its place.
Wrong-on-purpose works when the room is smart, the constraint is hard, and the cost of mid-flight misalignment is high. It fails when stakeholders won’t catch the mistake — then you’ve just shipped wrong work.
TWO TAKEAWAYS
WHERE THE METHOD TRAVELS
WORKS
- Senior cross-functional rooms
- Time-boxed engagements
- Regulated industries (pharma, finance, healthcare)
- Late-stage product correction
FAILS
- Early-stage clients without domain depth
- Junior stakeholders — wrong-on-purpose costs reputation without information
- Low-stakes UX
- Async-only teams (no daily review surface)