I Make OVERWHELMINGCONFUSINGOVERWHELMING
stuff feel simple
And obvious

A reach number, not a results number. It counts the people who showed up in the backend running real mentoring through MySpark, which proves the app shipped and got used. Whether it made anyone a better mentor is a longer study than I had.

Three audiences with genuinely different jobs, served by one product instead of three bolted together. Each of mentor, mentee, and people developer gets a real fit, without the app going generic to cover all three at once.

An internal mentoring tool's failure mode is becoming admin, a box you tick and resent. I put progress on the dashboard itself, so the first thing you open to is what you've committed to and how far you've moved. Using it reads as improving, not reporting upward.

This isn't a jump from bad to good. People were already reading a Prasasti at 81.4% accuracy, and gamified learning moved them to 85.2%. Late gains on an already-high number are the hard ones to win, so those few points mean more than the size makes it sound.

Most people who tried both said they'd rather learn this way than the conventional drill. That's a preference, not a test score, but it's the thing that decides whether someone opens the app a second time. For a subject people usually quit, wanting to come back is most of the battle.

System Usability Scale, graded A, in the range they call excellent. This is the number I trust most in the project. It says the app itself got out of the way, so the difficulty was the script, which is the hard part, and not the interface, which shouldn't be.

6 page templates carry the whole catalog, 40+ machines across 9 brands. The system scales by adding data, not by redrawing a page each time a new machine lands. A count from the live site, not a target.

A first-time buyer researching a machine and an existing owner needing one serviced want opposite things from the same site. One structure routes both without either having to hunt, and without the page splitting in two to do it.

Josh came in with a concept. I took it from that brief through to the shipped site, developing the design, then reviewing the developer's live build and marking up where it had drifted. Not one slice of it, the whole thing.

Content targets down the org hierarchy, directorate to division to department to function. A real count from the PRD, so a procedure reaches the team it is for instead of everyone.

Sole designer across all five Phase 1 epics, from login through the feed, social interactions, and profile. Owned the whole MVP surface, not one slice of it.

The short-video feed kept people with the material instead of bouncing off it. Early cohorts spent roughly double the time learning an SOP. A modelled read, a strong signal, not a measured result.

The old page buried the phone number under everything a visitor didn't ask for. I cut it to the parts that make someone call. Modelled from the client's closing range after launch, so I'd call it an estimate I stand behind, not a tracked number.

Homepage, loan products, suburb pages, the business loan pillar, calculators. Most of them designed from scratch as the site grew past the original audit.

The page had no argument, people scrolled 37% and left. I reordered it around a sequence I could defend, build trust, then show what sets Stryve apart, then proof, then testimonials. A decision visible in the file, not a measured funnel change.